xazax.hun added a comment. Note that when you update the differential revision you need to upload the whole diff. Your diff now only contains the tests but not the code.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D34275#785189, @wangxindsb wrote: > > How do you handle the following case? > > > > struct A { > > A() { > > X x; > > x.virtualMethod(); // this virtual call is ok > > } > > } > > int main() { > > A a; > > } > > I use the checker to check the code above, the checker works as expect and > doesn't throw the warning. What about: struct A { A() { X x; x.virtualMethod(); // this virtual call is ok foo(); // should warn here } virtual foo(); } int main() { A a; } Does the checker warn on the second call? ================ Comment at: virtualcall.cpp:1 -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=optin.cplusplus.VirtualCall -analyzer-store region -verify -std=c++11 %s -// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=optin.cplusplus.VirtualCall -analyzer-store region -analyzer-config optin.cplusplus.VirtualCall:Interprocedural=true -DINTERPROCEDURAL=1 -verify -std=c++11 %s ---------------- Please add the appropriate run lines so you can run the tests using `make check`. https://reviews.llvm.org/D34275 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
