@@ -788,7 +791,7 @@ class PathDiagnostic : public llvm::FoldingSetNode {
PathDiagnostic(StringRef CheckerName, const Decl *DeclWithIssue,
StringRef bugtype, StringRef verboseDesc, StringRef shortDesc,
StringRef category,
@@ -788,7 +791,7 @@ class PathDiagnostic : public llvm::FoldingSetNode {
PathDiagnostic(StringRef CheckerName, const Decl *DeclWithIssue,
StringRef bugtype, StringRef verboseDesc, StringRef shortDesc,
StringRef category,
https://github.com/steakhal closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/NagyDonat approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:white_check_mark: With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code
formatter.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
github-actions[bot] wrote:
:white_check_mark: With the latest revision this PR passed the Python code
formatter.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://github.com/steakhal updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
>From 94c6be96d92d8a25693ccbbffedf9edabfe79cc5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Balazs Benics
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 21:18:30 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] [analyzer] Set and display CSA analysis entry points as
NagyDonat wrote:
> Did you envision [debug] XYZ, and XYZ [-analyzer-note-analysis-entry-points]?
Which should I pursue?
I slightly prefer [debug] because this mode can be activated by two different
flags, but mentioning the flag is also fine.
(Sorry for not answering earlier, I didn't have a
steakhal wrote:
Ping @NagyDonat
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
steakhal wrote:
> However, I feel an urge to bikeshed that the "[invisible]" prefix is a bit
> puzzling for the developer who encounters it. Consider replacing it with the
> prefix "[debug]" which is a more conventional signal for "this is a debug
> printout" (i.e. normal users won't see it).
https://github.com/NagyDonat commented:
Seems reasonable at first glance.
However, I feel an urge to bikeshed that the "[invisible]" prefix is a bit
puzzling for the developer who encounters it. Consider replacing it with the
prefix "[debug]" which is a more conventional signal for "this is a
https://github.com/steakhal unassigned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/steakhal unassigned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/steakhal unassigned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/steakhal unassigned
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-static-analyzer-1
Author: Balazs Benics (steakhal)
Changes
When debugging CSA issues, sometimes it would be useful to have a dedicated
note for the analysis entry point, aka. the function name you would need to
pass as "-analyze-function=XYZ" to
https://github.com/steakhal created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84823
When debugging CSA issues, sometimes it would be useful to have a dedicated
note for the analysis entry point, aka. the function name you would need to
pass as "-analyze-function=XYZ" to reproduce a specific
17 matches
Mail list logo
