Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
semantic type checks
#1
It is written in the misra document that the operands for > must be unsigned. In my humble opinion, you are missing something. Semantic type checks are not particularly safe, I claim they are dangerous.

Sanitizers, static analyzers and compilers are checking that the operands are not negative. By following this MISRA advice, these checks are "disabled".

Simple example code:
Code:
int32_t foo(void)
{
    int32_t x = -1;
    return x >> 3;
}

This is UB so the static analyzers/compilers/sanitizers will write a warning. For instance 1 tool writes:
Shifting a negative value is technically undefined behaviour

If MISRA is enforced then the operand must be casted to unsigned somewhere, the developer might change it to:
Code:
int32_t foo(void)
{
    int32_t x = -1;
    return (uint32_t)x >> 3;
}

Now the tools don't complain. The bug is hidden.

To help prevent some such damage, I have thought about a rule that makes such casts illegal, when there is loss of precision or loss of sign in explicit casts. But that is used by intention sometimes, as far as I know, so it might be noisy.
<t></t>
Reply


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)