NoQ planned changes to this revision. NoQ added a comment. This is all wrong. While `RetainCountChecker` is more function-local than, say, `MallocChecker`, we still can't say for sure that it is the bottom frame's function (or block) that should be owning the object in this case. Ideally it should, but that's not the pattern that the checker is de facto trying to find. The checker is usually fine seeing a pointer allocated in a top function and released in a sub-block. If the bottom frame is over-releasing, we'd warn, but it wouldn't be simply because the bottom frame is over-releasing, so mentioning the particular stack frame may end up being misleading.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D36750 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
