NoQ added a comment. In D129498#3647348 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498#3647348>, @ASDenysPetrov wrote:
> In D129498#3644222 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498#3644222>, @NoQ wrote: > >> Maybe `clang_analyzer_range()` instead? > > This was its first name. I refused. First, because it emits concrete integers > as well and moreover we can extend it for arrays or strings e.g. Second, the > ranges is just an implementation detail and an actual thing we want to see is > an associated value. Ok how about `clang_analyzer_constraint()`? A concrete value could be thought of as constraint, and so can be range, or anything else any exotic constraint managers may decide to dump. ================ Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/print-ranges.cpp:1 +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config eagerly-assume=false -verify %s + ---------------- ASDenysPetrov wrote: > NoQ wrote: > > I suspect this test will crash when clang is built with Z3, because the Z3 > > constraint manager doesn't implement your new function yet. > Agree. Is it enough `REQUIRES: no-z3` or to add `#ifdef ANALYZER_CM_Z3`? That should be good. My personal tradition in such cases is to double-check that this doesn't disable the test entirely. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
