On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Jordy Rose <jedik...@belkadan.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 May 2010 14:56:02 -0700, Ted Kremenek <kreme...@apple.com> > wrote: > > On May 28, 2010, at 5:11 PM, Jordy Rose wrote: > > > >> I'm not entirely happy with the replacement of *p with p[0] in > >> GRExprEngine, but that seems to be the last place where you can tell > the > >> difference between a binding to p and a binding to p[0]. > > > > How are they semantically different? The StoreManager cares about the > > semantics of the operation, and not how it was written. For that we can > go > > back to the AST. > > Well, PR7218 is about confusing a direct binding to p[0] as a direct > binding for the entire p-region when looking up p[1], since RegionBindings > stores them the same way. If element super regions can have direct > bindings, and they look the same as element bindings, then it's important > to distinguish the two. > This is a problem of the current BindingKey design, which is supposed to be fixed in another "flat" store model. Fortunately this problem hasn't caused much trouble until now. > > (Also, thanks for the explanation about LazyCompoundVal.) >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
