We could, but it would mean updating seven places instead of just two.

~Aaron

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Looks fine. It's a bit nasty that we see null pointers here in the
> first place, though; have you checked whether the callers could easily
> be taught to not call these functions with null pointers?
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This patch addresses PR14577; basically, if you have an invalid
>> function declaration (comes back null), then attempt to set it to
>> default or delete, we would crash because of dyn_cast usage.  The
>> patch switches the code over to dyn_cast_or_null and adds a few test
>> cases.
>>
>> ~Aaron
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

Reply via email to