balazs-benics-sonarsource wrote: > > I remember debugging this. Fun times. I wonder if we could do even better > > by smuggling in some reference to that helper function, so we could move > > that global into a field. E.g. as a sibling of the allocator pool. > > I have been looking at this, and I am not sure is it worth? IIUC the > allocator comes from `ExprEngine.Engine.G`, and the `CallEventManager` > belongs to `ProgramStateManager` that also belongs to the `ExprEngine`. So > they should be destroyed at the "same" time. This said, instead of having a > static, just having it be a member of `CallEvenManager` should be equivalent > (and thread safe), shouldn't it?
Technically the solution is correct. It's just a matter of taste of using globals. That said, I'm not opposing, I just wanted to know if you considered this at all. It seems you did, so if you say it's not worth it, I'm not going to insist. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/161327 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
