Szelethus added a comment. In D63279#1939435 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D63279#1939435>, @xazax.hun wrote:
> In D63279#1939349 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D63279#1939349>, @Szelethus wrote: > > > (note: I forgot to submit this a couple weeks ago) > > > > LLVM is crashing on me due to the issue mentioned in D75678 > > <https://reviews.llvm.org/D75678>, but on Bitcoin, Xerces, CppCheck and > > Rtags I observed no difference in between the 2 runs. I recall that others > > mentioned that @szepet used to run his analyses with other configurations. > > I'll read final report and take another look later. > > > > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-August/055259.html > > > You mean no difference in the reports? It is very unlikely to get lucky and > gain/loose reports. Peter used to check the statistics emitted by the > analyzer such as basic block coverage. I'll be honest, I don't see myself redoing his evaluation anytime soon -- since its not crashing, I guess we could just enable it? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63279/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63279 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
