efriedma added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/AST/ItaniumMangle.cpp:1659
mangleCXXDtorType(Dtor_Complete);
+ assert(ND);
writeAbiTags(ND, AdditionalAbiTags);
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This seems incorrect -- if the declaration name is a destructor, then `ND`
> should always be null, right?
Seems okay to me? ND is the destructor declaration.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CGObjCMac.cpp:1806
// Complex types.
+ assert(contBB);
CGF.EmitBlock(contBB);
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Hmmm, is assert the correct approach here? It seems to me that a Complex
> rvalue will trigger this assertion. I think this deserves some additional
> thinking rather than silencing the static analysis warning. CC @efriedma
> @rjmccall who might have ideas.
Yes, if a complex value hit this codepath with a null contBB, it would just
crash, so the analysis is flagging a real issue.
I'm not sure how to write ObjC code to actually trigger this codepath, though.
Probably involves a `_Complex _BitInt(128)` or something like that.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D156274/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D156274
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
