On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:28 AM, Richard Smith <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Ted Kremenek <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Author: kremenek >> Date: Sat Sep 8 02:18:18 2012 >> New Revision: 163460 >> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=163460&view=rev >> Log: >> Fix bug in BugReporter::RemoveUneededCalls() where "prunable" >> PathDiagnosticEventPieces were *always* pruned. Instead, they >> are suppose to only be pruned if the entire call gets pruned. >> >> Modified: >> cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter.cpp >> cfe/trunk/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporterVisitors.cpp >> cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/malloc-plist.c >> cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/plist-output-alternate.m >> cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/plist-output.m >> cfe/trunk/test/Analysis/retain-release.m > > > Analysis/retain-release.m has been failing nondeterministically since > r163455 (maybe before). Can you take a look? At r163460, the failure looks > like this: > > src/tools/clang/test/Analysis/retain-release.m:13645:16: error: > CHECK-NEXT: is not on the line after the previous match > // CHECK-NEXT: <key>kind</key><string>control</string> > ^ > build/tools/clang/test/Analysis/Output/retain-release.m.tmp.objcpp.plist:11772:2: > note: 'next' match was here > <key>kind</key><string>control</string> > ^ > build/tools/clang/test/Analysis/Output/retain-release.m.tmp.objcpp.plist:11728:8: > note: previous match was here > <dict> > ^ > I was actually writing a reply to that commit (163455). We should keep the discussion there. Ted has been trying to stabilize this for quite a few commits now, and I think it's just not quite working yet.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
