[PATCH] D58894: [analyzer] Handle modification of vars inside an expr with comma operator

[Djordje Todorovic via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

djtodoro marked an inline comment as done.
djtodoro added a comment.

> Anyways, this looks good in this state.
> Thank you for working on this!

Thanks!

> If you don't intend to immediately work on fixing the rest of , cases here,
> *please* do file a bug so it won't get lost. (and link it here)

I already extended this in order to support the rest of direct mutations.



================
Comment at: lib/Analysis/ExprMutationAnalyzer.cpp:27
 
+AST_MATCHER_P(Expr, skipCommaOps,
+             ast_matchers::internal::Matcher<Expr>, InnerMatcher) {
----------------
lebedev.ri wrote:
> djtodoro wrote:
> > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > djtodoro wrote:
> > > > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > > > (Can anyone suggest a better name maybe?
> > > > > I'm not sure this is the most correct name, but i can't suggest a better alternative.)
> > > > Maybe `evalCommaExpr`?
> > > Ah, yes, `eval` sounds better.
> > > But, it won't always eval comma op or bailout.
> > > It will eval if it is there.
> > > So maybe `maybeEvalCommaExpr` (pun intended!).
> > Sure, `maybeEvalCommaExpr ` sounds better.
> > Or, one more suggestion is `tryEvalCommaExpr` ?
> `try`, at least to me, has the same meaning as `evalCommaExpr`, i.e. one might expect that if it fails, it will fail.
> So not sure.
Hmm, I agree. You are right. Let it be `maybeEvalCommaExpr` (for now), if there is no better suggestion.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D58894/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D58894