aaron.ballman added a comment. In D65912#1622963 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D65912#1622963>, @ZaMaZaN4iK wrote:
> > One thing I would be interested in knowing is how often the check behaves > > when run over some large, real-world code bases. Does it catch any true > > positives? Does it have false positives? > > I have no such statistics for this check. But I have statistics for identical > check from PVS-Studio - https://www.viva64.com/en/examples/v624/ If you're trying to match that check's behavior, it may change how we proceed on this patch -- for instance, PVS seems to catch constants similar to known constants but are not exact matches. You kind of do that, but we should probably make the epsilon configurable and have some data behind whatever default value we pick in terms of false positives triggered. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D65912/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D65912 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
