================
@@ -44,20 +45,24 @@ class SanitizerSpecialCaseList : public
llvm::SpecialCaseList {
StringRef Category = StringRef()) const;
// Query ignorelisted entries if any bit in Mask matches the entry's section.
- // Return 0 if not found. If found, return the line number (starts with 1).
- unsigned inSectionBlame(SanitizerMask Mask, StringRef Prefix, StringRef
Query,
- StringRef Category = StringRef()) const;
+ // Return NotFound (0,0) if not found. If found, return the file index number
+ // and the line number (FileIdx, LineNo) (FileIdx starts with 1 and LineNo
+ // starts with 0).
+ std::pair<unsigned, unsigned>
----------------
shafik wrote:
I feel like this is almost an anti-pattern, using std::pair like this. We have
two opaque values that we now have to go back to the function to understand
what they mean.
If you had a type (class) with two members (`FileIdx` and `LineNo`) then it
would make sense at each use as opposed to `first` and `second` which is not
informative.
I actually don't see the values explicitly used but I am assuming they will be
in a later change.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141640
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
