MTC added a comment. I'm totally fine with this patch personally. However I am not familiar with this part, so can't give substantial help :).
================ Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/CheckerRegistry.cpp:51 -/// Collects the checkers for the supplied \p opt option into \p collected. -static void collectCheckers(const CheckerRegistry::CheckerInfoList &checkers, - const llvm::StringMap<size_t> &packageSizes, - CheckerOptInfo &opt, CheckerInfoSet &collected) { - // Use a binary search to find the possible start of the package. - CheckerRegistry::CheckerInfo packageInfo(nullptr, opt.getName(), ""); - auto end = checkers.cend(); - auto i = std::lower_bound(checkers.cbegin(), end, packageInfo, checkerNameLT); - - // If we didn't even find a possible package, give up. - if (i == end) - return; - - // If what we found doesn't actually start the package, give up. - if (!isInPackage(*i, opt.getName())) - return; - - // There is at least one checker in the package; claim the option. - opt.claim(); - - // See how large the package is. - // If the package doesn't exist, assume the option refers to a single checker. - size_t size = 1; - llvm::StringMap<size_t>::const_iterator packageSize = - packageSizes.find(opt.getName()); - if (packageSize != packageSizes.end()) - size = packageSize->getValue(); - - // Step through all the checkers in the package. - for (auto checkEnd = i+size; i != checkEnd; ++i) - if (opt.isEnabled()) - collected.insert(&*i); - else - collected.remove(&*i); +static CheckerInfoSet getEnabledCheckers( + const CheckerRegistry::CheckerInfoList &checkers, ---------------- I just curious about the reason why you move the `CheckerInfoSet` from the parameter passing by reference to the return value, keep the number of parameter at a lower value? Or make the code at the caller cite cleaner? https://reviews.llvm.org/D54401 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits