[cfe-commits] [PATCH][Review Request]Handle CXXTemproraryObjectExpr

[Jim Goodnow II]

Hmm, how's this? About all that CXXConstructExpr currently does is 
invalidate arguments. The only difference between CXXConstructExpr and 
CXXTemporaryObjectExpr is some source type information and that 
CXXTemporaryObjectExpr's have none or more than one argument. So, this 
test verifies that the constructor is handled by the engine now and 
verifies that arguments are invalidated.

  - jim

Index: test/Analysis/misc-ps-cxx0x.cpp
===================================================================
--- test/Analysis/misc-ps-cxx0x.cpp    (revision 141126)
+++ test/Analysis/misc-ps-cxx0x.cpp    (working copy)
@@ -9,3 +9,27 @@
    *p = 0xDEADBEEF; // expected-warning {{null}}
  }

+// Tests for CXXTemporaryObjectExpr.
+struct X {
+    X( int *ip, int );
+};
+
+// Test to see if CXXTemporaryObjectExpr is being handled.
+int tempobj1()
+{
+  int j;
+  int i;
+  X a = X( &j, 1 );
+
+  return i; // expected-warning {{Undefined or garbage value returned 
to caller}}
+}
+
+// Test to see if CXXTemporaryObjectExpr invalidates arguments.
+int tempobj2()
+{
+  int j;
+  X a = X( &j, 1 );
+
+  return j; // no-warning
+}
+


On 10/4/2011 3:21 PM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
> Test case please.  :)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: CXXTemporaryObjectTest.patch
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20111005/beac1b38/attachment.ksh>