hintonda added a comment. In D59802#1475596 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59802#1475596>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D59802#1474300 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59802#1474300>, @hintonda wrote: > > > @aaron.ballman, I just ran it over llvm/lib, including all in-tree headers, > > and it seems to work fine. However, it did miss this one: > > > > - if (V && isa<Instruction>(V) && (EntInst = cast<Instruction>(V)) && + > > if (isa_and_nonnull<Instruction>(V) && (EntInst = cast<Instruction>(V)) > > && > > > > It got the first, but not the second. Not sure how to pick that one up. > > Even ran it a second time on just that file, but still didn't pick it up. > > Any ideas? > > > I don't think it's a critical case to cover for the check, but yeah, it looks > like that code really wants to be `(EntInst = > dyn_cast_or_null<Instruction>(V))`. I think that looking for a pattern to > handle this case would be tricky though and given how infrequent it seems to > show up in the code base, I am not too worried. Someone applying the check > will still get a notice for the `Var && isa<Type>(Var)` part of the > expression, so they can hopefully see there's more related cleanup to be done. Okay, thanks for looking. I'll go ahead and land this today, and if I think of a good way to handle this case, I'll update it later. Thanks again for all your help... Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59802/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59802 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
