r.stahl added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Frontend/AnalysisConsumer.cpp:357 + return true; + if (!RTy->hasConstFields()) + return true; ---------------- xazax.hun wrote: > I wonder what would happen with types that has const fields and user written > constructors. In case we will not simulate the effect of the constructor and > will not be able to set the const fields maybe we should exclude those as > well? I added a test for that and it doesn't seem to work. It just ends up as unknown which is fine, right? Eventually it would be nice to do that of course. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D46421/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D46421 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
