[PATCH] D77809: [Analyzer] Include typedef statements in CFG build.

[Balázs Kéri via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

balazske marked an inline comment as done.
balazske added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/cfg.cpp:570
 }
 
+// CHECK-LABEL: void vla_simple(int x)
----------------
balazske wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Can you also add tests for:
> > ```
> > int vla_unevaluated(int x) {
> >   // Evaluates the ++x
> >   sizeof(int[++x]);
> >   // Does not evaluate the ++x
> >   _Alignof(int[++x]);
> >   _Generic((int(*)[++x])0, default : 0);
> >   
> >   return x;
> > }
> > ```
> > 
> > Also, it's a bit strange to find these VLA tests in a .cpp file. VLAs are a C++ extension and we should have some testing for them for constructs that are C++-specific, but I would have expected many of these tests to be in a C file instead.
> Could be there platforms (on buildbot?) where the VLA code (in cpp file) does not compile? Is it worth to have a test with VLA type alias then?
I have this output for the test above (without the new code), is it correct?
(The `++` seems to be evaluated for the `alignof` statement too.)
```
int vla_unevaluated(int x)
 [B2 (ENTRY)]
   Succs (1): B1

 [B1]
   1: x
   2: ++[B1.1]
   3: [B1.2] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, int)
   4: sizeof(int [++x])
   5: x
   6: ++[B1.5]
   7: [B1.6] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, int)
   8: alignof(int [++x])
   9: 0
  10: x
  11: [B1.10] (ImplicitCastExpr, LValueToRValue, int)
  12: return [B1.11];
   Preds (1): B2
   Succs (1): B0

 [B0 (EXIT)]
   Preds (1): B1

```


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D77809/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D77809