On Wed, 15 May 2019, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>> On the other hand, I do care about causing false negatives. > >> > >> Do you find the missing warning after the addition of such an exclusion > >> specification interesting? > > > > I already suggested how to improve the code. > > I find that the idea “e2->fld” needs further clarification. > Such a SmPL specification will be resolved also to an expression, > won't it? Saving in a local variable doesn't impact the need to free the object. A field is the most obvious case where the object may not need freeing. But there are many expressions that e2->fld will not match. julia
