On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
> That said, the unfortunate thing about this is that it means that all
> checkers that implement VisitCallExpr() will need to do this checking. That
> seems really suboptimal. It seems to me that only a few checkers will care
> about operator methods.
Checkers that look at the name of the function called need to be aware that not
all names are simple identifiers. The seems completely reasonable to me.
- Doug
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
