mboehme accepted this revision.
mboehme added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/FlowSensitive/TypeErasedDataflowAnalysis.cpp:113
+ // Don't do anything special for CXXForRangeStmt, because the condition
(being
+ // implicitly generated) isn't visible from the loop body.
+
----------------
Making this purely a comment might risk getting it attached to the wrong method.
Consider adding an empty `VisitCXXForRangeStmt()`, which would make the "do
nothing" behavior explicit in code?
================
Comment at:
clang/unittests/Analysis/FlowSensitive/TypeErasedDataflowAnalysisTest.cpp:1631
+ const AnalysisOutputs &) {
+ EXPECT_THAT(Results.keys(), UnorderedElementsAre("after_loop"));
+ });
----------------
Is this check (and the `(void)0` with the `[[after_loop]` annotation) actually
needed?
IIUC, the condition we want to test is that the analysis converges. The fact
that it produces a `Results` entry for `[[after_loop]]` is really more a check
of the testing infrastructure rather than the analysis itself?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D158848/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D158848
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
