On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Anton Korobeynikov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Author: asl
> Date: Sat Sep 8 03:22:13 2012
> New Revision: 163465
>
> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=163465&view=rev
> Log:
> Do not construct StringRef from NULL argument.
>
> Modified:
> cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
>
> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp
> URL:
> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp?rev=163465&r1=163464&r2=163465&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp (original)
> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Basic/Targets.cpp Sat Sep 8 03:22:13 2012
> @@ -3014,7 +3014,7 @@
> return llvm::StringSwitch<const char*>(Name)
> .Cases("cortex-a8", "cortex-a9", "A")
> .Cases("cortex-m3", "cortex-m4", "cortex-m0", "M")
> - .Default(0);
> + .Default("");
How'd you come across this? Any reasonable test case?
(alternatively/in addition: should we annotate StringRef's ctor with
nonnull? (I don't suppose we bother with this in general, but given
the prevailing LLVM style of using raw zero literals (rather than the
NULL macro) for null pointers, I wonder whether it'd help catch a few
surprising cases))
> }
> virtual bool setCPU(const std::string &Name) {
> if (!getCPUDefineSuffix(Name))
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
