| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is especially important for arrays, since no one knows the proper
syntax for putting qualifiers in arrays.
nullability.h:3:26: warning: array parameter is missing a nullability type specifier (_Nonnull, _Nullable, or _Null_unspecified)
void arrayParameter(int x[]);
^
nullability.h:3:26: note: insert '_Nullable' if the array parameter may be null
void arrayParameter(int x[]);
^
_Nullable
nullability.h:3:26: note: insert '_Nonnull' if the array parameter should never be null
void arrayParameter(int x[]);
^
_Nonnull
rdar://problem/29524992
llvm-svn: 290132
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Previously the following code would warn on the use of "T":
template <typename T>
struct X {
typedef T *type;
};
...because nullability is /allowed/ on template parameters (because
they could be pointers). (Actually putting nullability on this use of
'T' will of course break if the argument is a non-pointer type.)
This fix doesn't handle the case where a template parameter is used
/outside/ of a typedef. That seems trickier, especially in parameter
position.
llvm-svn: 285856
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
_Uppercase_underscored
Addresses a conflict with glibc's __nonnull macro by renaming the type
nullability qualifiers as follows:
__nonnull -> _Nonnull
__nullable -> _Nullable
__null_unspecified -> _Null_unspecified
This is the major part of rdar://problem/21530726, but does not yet
provide the Darwin-specific behavior for the old names.
llvm-svn: 240596
|
|
|
Adds a new warning (under -Wnullability-completeness) that complains
about pointer, block pointer, or member pointer declarations that have
not been annotated with nullability information (directly or inferred)
within a header that contains some nullability annotations. This is
intended to be used to help maintain the completeness of nullability
information within a header that has already been audited.
Note that, for performance reasons, this warning will underrepresent
the number of non-annotated pointers in the case where more than one
pointer is seen before the first nullability type specifier, because
we're only tracking one piece of information per header. Part of
rdar://problem/18868820.
llvm-svn: 240158
|
