Improve the description of these command line options by providing specific heuristic information, as outlined for the ssp function attribute(s) in LLVM's documentation.
|1634–1636 ↗||(On Diff #177239)|
I'm not sure what's the policy for related options but I feel the description should stand on its own. I'd therefor start by:
"Enable stack protectors for some functions potentially vulnerable to stack smashing. Compared to -fstack-protector, this uses a stronger heuristic (....)"
If the policy is to avoid such repeatition then please ignore this comment.
|1638 ↗||(On Diff #177239)|
Not a native english speaker but I feel that "potentially" is redundant given you said it enables stack protector for *some* functions. Perhaps rewrite it along the lines of:
"Enable stack protectors for some of the functions vulnerable to stack smashing based on simple heuristic"
with a better word than "simple". This conveys both that not all functions are protected and suggests that a better heuristic is possible. You can then easily refer the reader to -fstack-protector-strong and -fstack-protector-all in a following sentence.