martong added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp:436
case CXXConstructExpr::CK_Complete: {
+ assert(CE && "Complete constructors cannot be inherited!");
std::tie(State, Target) =
----------------
baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> martong wrote:
> > Should there be rather `CIE` in the assert? Or the text after `&&` is
> > confusing.
> Surely not `CIE`, since the code below uses `CE`. I see nothing confusing
> here: `CE` must exist because complete constructors cannot be inherited, thus
> `CIE` cannot exist.
Maybe it's just me and seems like nit picking, but this is still confusing for
me b/c above `CK` gets its value either from `CE` or from `CIE`. And the case
depends on the kind of `CK`.
Perhaps it would be more expressive (?) : `assert(!CIE && CE && "Inherited
constructors cannot be complete!");`
Alternatively maybe the assert above in line 400 could be `assert(!CE !=
!CIE);` to express that it is either inherited or not but cannot be both
(logical xor).
Repository:
rC Clang
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D74735/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D74735
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
