On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > Author: kremenek > Date: Tue May 1 12:56:57 2012 > New Revision: 155923 > > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=155923&view=rev > Log: > Remove dead code found by static analyzer. > > Modified: > cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp > > Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp > URL: > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp?rev=155923&r1=155922&r2=155923&view=diff > ============================================================================== > --- cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp (original) > +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Frontend/CompilerInstance.cpp Tue May 1 12:56:57 2012 > @@ -861,11 +861,6 @@ > // Determine what file we're searching from. > SourceManager &SourceMgr = getSourceManager(); > SourceLocation ExpandedImportLoc = SourceMgr.getExpansionLoc(ImportLoc); > - const FileEntry *CurFile > - = SourceMgr.getFileEntryForID(SourceMgr.getFileID(ExpandedImportLoc)); > - if (!CurFile) > - CurFile = SourceMgr.getFileEntryForID(SourceMgr.getMainFileID());
Would it be practical for Clang to have a warning that caught this (at least incrementally) - the assignment inside the conditional is dead - nothing after it reads CurFile, so it would be nice if we warned. (& then the user would probably be able to see that the rest of this was silly too) > - > StringRef ModuleName = Path[0].first->getName(); > SourceLocation ModuleNameLoc = Path[0].second; > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
