steakhal accepted this revision. steakhal added a comment. In D124621#3482782 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D124621#3482782>, @mantognini wrote:
> In D124621#3481973 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D124621#3481973>, @steakhal > wrote: > >> BTW have you measured the observable impact of this patch on large >> codebases? Do you have any stats? > > I can't share the data but I can say it fixes some user reports. :-) For the upcoming patches, it would be nice to test the patches on a small set of open-source projects for exactly this reason. I think there is a `clang/utils/analyzer/SATest.py` script helping you on this part. It seems we have quite a few projects on the testset `clang/utils/analyzer/projects/projects.json`. We are not using it, because we have a different internal testing infrastructure, but it's definitely better than nothing. > I think @NoQ refers to https://reviews.llvm.org/D45774 but I'll wait for a > week or so for confirmation in case there's more to it. Cool! ================ Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/RegionStore.cpp:1982-1984 // Check if the region has a binding. if (const Optional<SVal> &V = B.getDirectBinding(R)) return *V; ---------------- @NoQ I was always puzzled why don't we check if we have default bindings after checking direct bindings. Do you have anything about that? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D124621/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D124621 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
