[PATCH] D10305: [Clang Static Analyzer] Bug identification

Fri Oct 16 05:43:37 PDT 2015

xazax.hun added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#268777, @phillip.power wrote:

> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#262534, @xazax.hun wrote:
>
> > - Should we require the generation of old hashes once a change is introduced, or should we expect users who rely on old hash to maintain the old hash generation as an out of tree patch?
>
>
> I will likely release the analyzer with all the previous hashes generated by default.  I am happy to enable old hashes out of tree, as long as enabling is a small change.

In case the clang maintainers do not want to support old hashes, I think it should be as easy to maintain them as out of tree patches as possible.

> 

> 

> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305#262534, @xazax.hun wrote:

> 

> > - The hash calculation WILL change in the near future once we figured out how to identify checkers properly (but I think it will not make sense to rename the hash for this change). For this reason I think we should mark this feature as experimental, until that change is introduced. What is the recommended way, to do that? Generating a comment to the plist? Just adding a comment to the headers? Only mention it in the commit log?

> 

> 

> How close is "the near future"?  I would like to start using the hashing feature in the next couple of weeks.  If your checker identification improvements are a long time out, I would like you to submit the current hash as non-experimental.

As soon as I get some feedback for this mail: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-October/045368.html . I think Anna and her team is busy right now due to the LLVM Meeting. If I do not get a response, I will commit this patch as is, and address those questions in a separate commit. Once the problem with the checker identifier is resolved, I think this feature should no longer be treated as experimental.

> Best regards,

> Phillip

>  SN Systems - Sony Computer Entertainment

http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305