> On Jun 13, 2014, at 1:36 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why does this happen with this test case? AFAIK the "there are no such calls" > note is still correct. >
Attached is an updated patch that reinstates the "there are no such calls" note and explains why the BlockEdge is possible in the comment. > Since this is testing where the allocation statement is located, can you make > this a path-notes/plist test, so that we can verify that it's actually > picking the right statement? This is not testing where the allocation statement is located but corrects a case where we were previously crashing. > > Jordan > > > On Jun 13, 2014, at 13:33 , Anna Zaks <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Fixes a crash in Retain Count checker error reporting logic by handing the >> allocation statement retrieval from a BlockEdge program point. >> >> Anna. >> <fixCrashInRetainCountReporting.diff> >
fixCrashInRetainCountReporting2.diff
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
