NagyDonat wrote:

> Have you explored teaching the relevant checker to not raise the issues?
> I'm surprised that we need to change the engine to achieve this.

@steakhal I'm not opposed to handling this in the checkers, but if this is 
indeed an established idiom, then I think that this single change in the engine 
is a better approach than suppressing this in the relevant checker(s)... and 
later adding more suppressions if it turns out that this affects other checkers 
as well.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/187530
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to