You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Recommendations for which sanitizers to enable #41
As time passes, the g++/clang++ gain more new sanitizers, existing ones get better, and some get ported to new platforms (e.g. recently leak support was added to OS X in clang++ 5).
Similar to #37 for warnings, This ticket can serve as a central place to start documenting a recommended list of sanitizer flags to use. I intend this to be a quick, opinionated reference to check before you would dive deeper into docs like https://clang.llvm.org/docs/UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer.html.
The relevant questions I see are:
🍇 Which sanitizers should we always test with?
🍊 Which additional flags or environment variables should we use?
🍏 Which additional flags should be used when testing the sanitizers on CI systems?
🍎 Which additional flags should be used when building sanitized binaries for live testing?
Refs:
source of truth for which sanitizers are in which groupings:
Activity
springmeyer commentedon Nov 9, 2017
Noting that
-fsanitize=pointer-overflowwas added in clang++ 5.x: https://wdtz.org/catching-pointer-overflow-bugs.html and is part of theundefinedgroup.