Frama-C-discuss mailing list archives
This page gathers the archives of the old Frama-C-discuss archives, that was hosted by Inria's gforge before its demise at the end of 2020. To search for mails newer than September 2020, please visit the page of the new mailing list on Renater.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- From: pascal.cuoq at gmail.com (Pascal Cuoq)
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 00:40:04 +0200
- In-reply-to: <4DA30485.90406@cea.fr>
- References: <13076_1302517051_4DA2D53B_13076_26_2_12615CBFF54930468079CF80A7B13553361127D900@DE0-MAILMBX-P13.res.airbus.corp> <989_1302517535_4DA2D718_989_108_2_BANLkTi=UC+p_cUmwcphFxauyKmVKacF0GA@mail.gmail.com> <22822_1302528270_4DA3010E_22822_291_2_12615CBFF54930468079CF80A7B13553361127DF88@DE0-MAILMBX-P13.res.airbus.corp> <4DA30485.90406@cea.fr>
On 4/11/11, Julien Signoles <Julien.Signoles at cea.fr> wrote: > If you are using the value analysis plug-in, its specific limitations > and hypotheses are explained in Chapter 4 "Limitations and > Specificities" of the Value Analysis manual. As this chapter says > nothing special about function pointers, they are fully supported by > this plug-in. Although in another chapter, a limitation regarding function pointers is expressed in the following inscrutable manner : ___ Invalid function pointer access When the value analysis encounters a statement of the form (*e)(x); and is unable to guarantee that expression e evaluates to a valid function address, an alarm is emitted. For historical reasons, the implementation of this particular alarm category is not very consistent with the others. This will be fixed in a later version. ___ But to have mysterious limitations about functions pointers, you need to handle function pointers in the first place, so Julien's reasoning holds. Basically, it's impossible to organize this manual in a way such that people find what they are looking for (as demonstrated weekly by the questions in this mailing list), so the best solution is for everyone to learn it by heart. It's only 70 pages. Native English speakers' grammatical remarks that they might have in the process of doing so are also welcome.
- Follow-Ups:
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- From: pascal.cuoq at gmail.com (Pascal Cuoq)
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- References:
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- From: sali.sene at airbus.com (SENE, Sali)
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- From: sali.sene at airbus.com (SENE, Sali)
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- From: Julien.Signoles at cea.fr (Julien Signoles)
- [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- Prev by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] Difference between Kernel_function and GFun node
- Next by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- Previous by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- Next by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] problem with pre-processing
- Index(es):