Fix 13930: False positive: valueflow and other variable

[pfultz2]

No description provided.

[firewave]

Seems to have no performance impact.

Differences from #7800:

Details

--- selfcheck.exp 2025-09-16 19:07:40.536686518 +0200+++ selfcheck.res 2025-09-16 19:10:17.478078548 +0200@@ -12375,15 +12375,15 @@
= always 0
0 always 0
Line 1366
- ch possible {symbolic=(next),symbolic=(end),0,62@103}+ ch possible {symbolic=(next),symbolic=(end),0,92,62@103}
!= {!<=-1,!>=2,0}
end possible {symbolic=(ch),62@103}
&& {!<=-1,!>=2,0}
- ch {!symbolic=(end),0}+ ch {!symbolic=(end),0,92}
!= {!<=-1,!>=2,1}
'\r' always 13
&& {!<=-1,!>=2,0}
- ch {!symbolic=(end),0,!13}+ ch {!symbolic=(end),0,!13,92}
!= {!<=-1,!>=2,1}
'\n' always 10
&& {!<=-1,!>=2,0}
@@ -13626,6 +13626,8 @@
tok2 possible symbolic=(tok->next)
Line 2108
true always 1
+Line 2109+ . possible symbolic=(tok2)
Line 2112
& {lifetime[Address]=(temp),!0}
Line 2113
@@ -15074,7 +15076,7 @@
Line 2872
"code point too large" always "code point too large"
Line 2876
- narrow always {!<=-1,!>=2}+ narrow {!<=-1,!>=2,0}
|| always {!<=-1,!>=2}
utf8 always {!<=-1,!>=2}
&& always {!<=-1,!>=2}

The change on Line 2109 seems suspect. I only realize that because I had the same diff with an unintentional issue I temporally introduced in another PR - see #7768 (comment).

[pfultz2]

@chrchr-github@danmar@orbitcowboy Can this be merged?

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[firewave]

The change on Line 2109 seems suspect. I only realize that because I had the same diff with an unintentional issue I temporally introduced in another PR - see #7768 (comment).

What about that change? I still think that is a bug.

[pfultz2]

The change on Line 2109 seems suspect. I only realize that because I had the same diff with an unintentional issue I temporally introduced in another PR - see #7768 (comment).

What about that change? I still think that is a bug.

@firewave Can you provide some more info? What source is this changing?