do {
nonloc::ConcreteInt CaseVal(getBasicVals().getValue(V1.Val.getInt()));
- DefinedOrUnknownSVal Res = SVator.EvalEQ(DefaultSt, CondV, CaseVal);
+ DefinedOrUnknownSVal Res = SVator.EvalEQ(DefaultSt ? DefaultSt : state,
+ CondV, CaseVal);
// Now "assume" that the case matches.
if (const GRState* stateNew = state->Assume(Res, true)) {
// Now "assume" that the case doesn't match. Add this state
// to the default state (if it is feasible).
- if (const GRState *stateNew = DefaultSt->Assume(Res, false)) {
- defaultIsFeasible = true;
- DefaultSt = stateNew;
+ if (DefaultSt) {
+ if (const GRState *stateNew = DefaultSt->Assume(Res, false)) {
+ defaultIsFeasible = true;
+ DefaultSt = stateNew;
+ }
+ else {
+ defaultIsFeasible = false;
+ DefaultSt = NULL;
+ }
}
-
+
// Concretize the next value in the range.
if (V1.Val.getInt() == V2.Val.getInt())
break;
return *p; // no-warning
}
+
+// PR 5969: the comparison of argc < 3 || argc > 4 should constraint the switch
+// statement from having the 'default' branch taken. This previously reported a false
+// positive with the use of 'v'.
+
+int pr5969(int argc, char *argv[]) {
+
+ int v;
+
+ if ((argc < 3) || (argc > 4)) return 0;
+
+ switch(argc) {
+ case 3:
+ v = 33;
+ break;
+ case 4:
+ v = 44;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return v; // no-warning
+}
+
+int pr5969_positive(int argc, char *argv[]) {
+
+ int v;
+
+ if ((argc < 3) || (argc > 4)) return 0;
+
+ switch(argc) {
+ case 3:
+ v = 33;
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return v; // expected-warning{{Undefined or garbage value returned to caller}}
+}