Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enable logging of default flags on tool invocation #8110

Closed

Conversation

NlightNFotis
Copy link
Contributor

This is addressing a review comment on #8093 and provides a message outlining the level of default checks applied at tool invocation.

Comment on lines +125 to +147

if(enabled)
{
log.status() << "Running with --standard-checks on: "
<< "bounds-check, pointer-check, pointer-primitive-check, "
"div-by-zero-check, "
<< "signed-overflow-check, undefined-shift-check and "
"unwinding-assertions are"
<< "**on** by default for this analysis run.\n"
<< messaget::eom;
;
}
else
{ // enabled == false
log.status() << "Running with --no-standard-checks on: "
<< "bounds-check, pointer-check, pointer-primitive-check, "
"div-by-zero-check, "
<< "signed-overflow-check, undefined-shift-check and "
"unwinding-assertions are "
<< "**off** by default for this analysis run.\n"
<< messaget::eom;
;
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could we perhaps do better in the sense that we log the checks that are actually on, rather than just listing the defaults. That is, IMHO --no-standard-checks --pointer-check should produce an output different from the above.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, the intention was to list the checks that are actually enabled.

@kroening
Copy link
Member

May I suggest to reduce the verbosity level. There is diminishing return from more output when the attention of a human operator is limited.

@NlightNFotis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this as I lack the bandwidth to revive/see this through.

If anyone wants to shepherd this in, feel free to re-open or to use the branch as the basis for a separate PR. Thanks for your time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants