NoQ added a comment.
In D70725#1765981 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D70725#1765981>, @xazax.hun wrote:
> the same call might both acquire and release handles (there are such calls in
> Fuchsia), so we might end up adding more than one note for a call for which
> we would need to add more than one transitions
Hmm, would this be too functional?:
std::vector<std::function> notes;
for (arg : args) {
if (isAcquired(param)) {
State = State->set(arg, Acquired);
notes.push_back([](Report) {
if (Report.isInteresting(arg))
return "Handle acquired here";
});
}
if (isReleased(param)) {
State = State->set(arg, Released);
notes.push_back([](Report) {
if (Report.isInteresting(arg))
return "Handle released here";
});
}
}
C.addTransition(State, C.getNoteTag(
// We might as well add a C.getNoteTag() overload
// to do this automatically.
[std::move(notes)](Report) {
for (note : notes)
note();
}));
Or, well, yeah, chain the nodes together; you anyway have to do this
occasionally due to clumsiness of the rest of the API.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D70725/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D70725
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
