This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL343048: [analyzer] Add a testing facility for testing
relationships between symbols. (authored by dergachev, committed by ).
Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.
Changed prior to commit:
https://rev
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rC343048: [analyzer] Add a testing facility for testing
relationships between symbols. (authored by dergachev, committed by ).
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52133
Files:
docs/analyzer/
george.karpenkov accepted this revision.
george.karpenkov added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ExprInspectionChecker.cpp:273
+
+ for (auto I : State->get()) {
+SymbolRef Sym = I.first;
---
NoQ added a comment.
Mm, i mean, that reason as good as well.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52133
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
NoQ marked an inline comment as done.
NoQ added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52133#1237312, @george.karpenkov wrote:
> @NoQ Actually I agree with @baloghadamsoftware that it makes sense to have a
> separate test, as this functionality should be tested regardless of
> svalbuilder-rear
george.karpenkov added a comment.
@NoQ Actually I agree with @baloghadamsoftware that it makes sense to have a
separate test, as this functionality should be tested regardless of
svalbuilder-rearrange-comparisons existence.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52133
___
NoQ marked an inline comment as done.
NoQ added a comment.
> Should not it we have its own test in `expr-inspection.c`?
This isn't usually necessary when we're testing all code paths anyway, but i
guess it's worth it to test our sanity-check warnings.
Comment at: lib/StaticAn
NoQ updated this revision to Diff 165810.
NoQ added a comment.
Address comments. Add more sanity checks and test them.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52133
Files:
docs/analyzer/DebugChecks.rst
lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ExprInspectionChecker.cpp
test/Analysis/expr-inspection.cpp
test/Analys
baloghadamsoftware added a comment.
This looks better than using the "raw" dumps.
Should not it we have its own test in `expr-inspection.c`?
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/ExprInspectionChecker.cpp:65
REGISTER_SET_WITH_PROGRAMSTATE(MarkedSymbols, SymbolRef)
+REGISTER
NoQ created this revision.
NoQ added reviewers: dcoughlin, xazax.hun, a.sidorin, george.karpenkov, szepet,
rnkovacs, baloghadamsoftware.
Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, Szelethus, jfb, mikhail.ramalho.
A test introduced in https://reviews.llvm.org/rC329780 was disabled in
https://reviews.
10 matches
Mail list logo
