omtcyfz added a subscriber: omtcyfz.
================
Comment at: lib/Analysis/CloneDetection.cpp:436
@@ +435,3 @@
+ if (IsInMacro) {
+ Signature.Complexity = 0;
+ }
----------------
Do I understand correctly that a code generated by a macro doesn't affect
"complexity" at all then?
```
TEST_F(QueryParserTest, Complete) {
std::vector<llvm::LineEditor::Completion> Comps =
QueryParser::complete("", 0, QS);
ASSERT_EQ(6u, Comps.size());
EXPECT_EQ("help ", Comps[0].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("help", Comps[0].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("let ", Comps[1].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("let", Comps[1].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("match ", Comps[2].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("match", Comps[2].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("set ", Comps[3].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("set", Comps[3].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("unlet ", Comps[4].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("unlet", Comps[4].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("quit", Comps[5].DisplayText);
EXPECT_EQ("quit ", Comps[5].TypedText);
Comps = QueryParser::complete("set o", 5, QS);
ASSERT_EQ(1u, Comps.size());
EXPECT_EQ("utput ", Comps[0].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("output", Comps[0].DisplayText);
Comps = QueryParser::complete("match while", 11, QS);
ASSERT_EQ(1u, Comps.size());
EXPECT_EQ("Stmt(", Comps[0].TypedText);
EXPECT_EQ("Matcher<Stmt> whileStmt(Matcher<WhileStmt>...)",
Comps[0].DisplayText);
}
```
This is an actual piece of code from
`extra/unittests/clang-query/QueryParserTest.cpp`. Yes, it is a test, but it
still is a nice example of how many macros can be found in code (especially if
we are talking about pure C or some weird C++).
Thus, I think it is reasonable to treat macro invocation as a `1`-"complexity"
node.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23316
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
