lebedev.ri added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/misc-no-recursion.cpp:153
+// CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE-7]]:3: note: Frame #1: function 'boo' calls function
'bar' here:
+// CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE-14]]:18: note: Frame #2: function 'bar' calls
function 'boo' here:
+// CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE-15]]:18: note: ... which was the starting point of
this call graph
----------------
NoQ wrote:
> Aha, yeah, the warning is present, i guess that part is correct, but look how
> your note `function 'bar' calls function 'boo' here:` doesn't really point
> into the body of 'bar'. In this case it still makes sense because it's easy
> to see that 'foo' is called from 'bar', but the chain of default arguments
> may be arbitrarily long (what if 'boo' has yet another default argument?).
> You might want to add a separate facility just to handle this edge case.
To make this more readable, the diag is:
```
/builddirs/llvm-project/build-Clang9-unknown/tools/clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/Output/misc-no-recursion.cpp.tmp.cpp:138:5:
warning: function 'boo' is part of call graph loop [misc-no-recursion]
int boo();
^
/builddirs/llvm-project/build-Clang9-unknown/tools/clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/Output/misc-no-recursion.cpp.tmp.cpp:140:6:
warning: function 'bar' is part of call graph loop [misc-no-recursion]
void bar() {
^
/builddirs/llvm-project/build-Clang9-unknown/tools/clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/Output/misc-no-recursion.cpp.tmp.cpp:138:5:
note: Example call graph loop, starting from function 'boo'
int boo();
^
/builddirs/llvm-project/build-Clang9-unknown/tools/clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/Output/misc-no-recursion.cpp.tmp.cpp:145:3:
note: Frame #1: function 'boo' calls function 'bar' here:
bar();
^
/builddirs/llvm-project/build-Clang9-unknown/tools/clang/tools/extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/Output/misc-no-recursion.cpp.tmp.cpp:139:18:
note: Frame #2: function 'bar' calls function 'boo' here:
void foo(int x = boo()) {}
^
```
Am i looking at this wrong, or all the info is present?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72362/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D72362
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
