On Mar 20, 2012, at 16:30, Anna Zaks wrote: > This seems to implement the first suggestion by Ted, where we attempt to > regenerate a single PathDiagnosticPiece, not the whole path, which would not > work for state-full visitors. Am I missing something?
Oh, I wasn't sure that was the final decision. It makes things a little easier on the checker writer to worry about visiting the same nodes twice, but MallocChecker is certainly still stateful. Still, if we really don't care about performance during diagnostic generation... > On Mar 20, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Jordan Rose wrote: > >> Any suggestions for alternate names for getInterestingObjectSetDescriptor()? >> I'm trying to make it clear it's an opaque value that's only supposed to be >> used for detecting changes... >> > > I don't think visitors should be implementing a callback for this. You should > be able to just check if the interesting symbols set in the bug reporter > changed.. Oh, it's not a visitor callback -- the interesting symbols and regions are stored in the BugReport. So it's just communication between the BugReport and the BugReporter. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
