baloghadamsoftware marked 2 inline comments as done.
baloghadamsoftware added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/MemRegion.h:1044
+class ParamWithoutVarRegion : public TypedValueRegion {
+ friend class MemRegionManager;
----------------
baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> NoQ wrote:
> > There should be only one way to express the parameter region. Let's call
> > this one simply `ParamRegion` or something like that, and
> > `assert(!isa<ParmVarDecl>(D))` in the constructor of `VarRegion`.
> Do you mean that we should use `ParamRegion` in every case, thus also when we
> have the definitioan for the function? I wonder whether it breaks too many
> things.
This will surely not work. The common handling of `ParamVarDecl` and `VarDecl`
is soo deeply rooted in the whole analyzer that separating them means creation
of a totally new analyzer engine from scratch.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77229/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D77229
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
