Charusso added a comment. In D62883#1545341 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62883#1545341>, @Szelethus wrote:
> In D62883#1545324 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62883#1545324>, @Charusso wrote: > > > As @NoQ pointed out we have some problem with that function. We are > > tracking *values* without using the `redecl()`-chain (see in > > https://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/DeclBase_8h_source.html#l00948), or without > > tracking conditions. You have solved(?) the latter, but the former is > > equally important to solve. > > > I'm a little confused, which is the "former" and "latter" you're referring to? I believe you have solved the condition tracking as you move in-place what is going on. >> I believe this patch should be on by default, but it requires to fix the "In >> which range do we track?" problem with D62978 >> <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62978>. > > I disagree with this. The reason why I'd like to make this an off-by-default > option is to implement my followup improvements incrementally (not only that, > but a whole family of conditions is going to be added), and allow us to > observe the changes those make in relation to this patch -- besides, I don't > really see this patch changing even if I manage to fix those issues. Would > you like to see a change being made to this specific patch? As you moving stuff around it just bypasses the usefulness of the mentioned two visitors, which is a problem. Also you have mentioned some very crazy bad side-effects which is yes, related to in which range do we operate. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62883/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62883 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits