Szelethus added a comment.
Cool!
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MoveChecker.cpp:528
ArrayRef<const MemRegion *> ExplicitRegions,
ArrayRef<const MemRegion *> Regions, const LocationContext *LCtx,
const CallEvent *Call) const {
----------------
This isn't specific to this revision, but I find the parameter name `Regions`
way too vague. Maybe `ImplicitRegions`?
================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/MoveChecker.cpp:540-542
+ // Explicit regions are the regions passed into the call directly, but
+ // not all of them end up being invalidated. The ones that do appear in
+ // the Regions array as well.
----------------
Really? Then I guess this needs to be updated in `CheckerDocumentation.cpp`:
```
/// \param ExplicitRegions The regions explicitly requested for invalidation.
/// For a function call, this would be the arguments. For a bind, this
/// would be the region being bound to.
```
To me, this clearly indicates that the elements of `ExplicitRegions` will be
invalidated. Does "requested for" really just mean "requested for potential"?
Since this happens //before// any invalidation, it could easily be interpreted
as "invalidated after the end of the callback".
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55289/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55289
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
