[PATCH] D38728: [analyzer] Use the signature of the primary template for issue hash calculation

[Gábor Horváth via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

xazax.hun added inline comments.


================
Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/IssueHash.cpp:39
+  // primary template.
+  if (const FunctionDecl *InstantiatedFrom =
+          Target->getInstantiatedFromMemberFunction())
----------------
martong wrote:
> Could we use here FunctionDecl::getPrimaryTemplate() ? That seems more general, it handles both specializations and instantiations.
Unfortunately `getPrimaryTemplate` is not sufficient. The function might be a member function of a template class. In this case, there is no primary template for the function (only for the enclosing class) but it still depends on a template parameter.


================
Comment at: test/Analysis/bug_hash_test.cpp:61
 
-// CHECK: <key>diagnostics</key>
+template <typename T>
+T f(T i) {
----------------
martong wrote:
> We could add a few more test cases:
> - a function template in class template
> - specializations vs instantiations
> - the combination of the above two (?)
> 
Good point.


================
Comment at: test/Analysis/bug_hash_test.cpp:1363
 // CHECK-NEXT:  </dict>
+// CHECK-NEXT:  <dict>
+// CHECK-NEXT:   <key>path</key>
----------------
martong wrote:
> I am not sure if this is possible, but could we add unit test just for the `GetSignature` function? Instead of these huge plist files?
> 
> I am thinking something like this:
> https://github.com/martong/friend-stats/blob/ed0c69ea3669c933204c799f59b85cd7b2507c34/ut/FriendFunctionsTest.cpp#L31
I think it is more convenient to use regression test for this purpose than unittests. But I replaced the long plist checking with something much more concise. 


https://reviews.llvm.org/D38728