On 25 April 2014 21:24, Ronald F. Guilmette <[email protected]> wrote: > Separately, a code example of the following general form was discussed: > > if (condition) variable = value1; > if (!condition) variable = value2; > use (variable); > > It was noted that code of this form can generate a "false positive" > warning, from some or many code analyzers, to the effect that "variable" > may be used while in an "uninitialized" state. I agree entirely that, > given code of the above form, the variable will never in fact be used > while in an uninitialized state, and that thus, any such warning is > rather unambiguously "false". I don't believe that I suggested > otherwise. I did however note that the warning in such cases may be > trivially quieted by the addition of an (unconditional) initialization > of "variable" somewhere prior to the code in question. But that would then hide the error condition of it being not set to a new value after initialisation. One better answer would be to have a way to annotate that after the two conditionals you assert that |variable| is initialised. Then a future, smarter static analyzer can attempt to prove you wrong. > I did that in > response to an assertion that eliminating such a warning might be in > some sense "too hard", even though the party or parties to which such > an assertion might apply was not specified. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"