Anna discussed with me and I think this is not a hot idea. It adds unnecessary complexity.
On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:30 PM, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:22 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On the other hand, MallocBugVisitor is currently stateful -- that is, it >> assumes it's never going to see the same node-pair twice, and that the nodes >> are always visited end-to-start. I can make it less stateful (i.e. accept >> the same node-pair twice), but getting it down all the way to no state means >> a fair amount of rewriting. Is it part of the design that visitors be >> non-stateful, in case we ever want to traverse the nodes in some other order? > > Hmm. What about make the state functional, and having that state maintained > by BugReporter as we walk the path? We could then generate state > speculatively, and throw it away when we don't care. Just a half baked idea, > that I haven't necessarily thought through. > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
