[PATCH] New functionality for the consumed analysis
chriswailes at google.com
Wed Aug 21 15:53:59 PDT 2013
Aaron, you are correct. There is not currently a test for that. I can
either add one to this patch or ensure that one is in the next patch.
DeLesely: That was the assumption that David and I came up with. This will
produce more errors, but should catch more bugs. There could be a problem,
however, when a method does change internal state, but not state that is
relevant to the "consumed/unconsumed" status of the object. This method
couldn't be marked constant, and would therefor transition the object out
of its known state.
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Delesley Hutchins <delesley at google.com>wrote:
> Comment at: lib/Analysis/Consumed.cpp:446
> @@ -419,1 +445,3 @@
> + if (!MethodDecl->isConst())
> + StateMap->setState(PState.getVar(), consumed::CS_Unknown);
> Is the assumption here that calling a non-const method puts the object
> into an unknown state? That's a correct, conservative judgement.
> However, an alternative is to assume that unmarked methods do not change
> the object state, which might be more user-friendly in the common case.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-commits