[PATCH] D106102: [analyzer][solver] Introduce reasoning for not equal to operator

[Manas Gupta via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

manas added a comment.

In D106102#3032888 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D106102#3032888>, @steakhal wrote:

> Okay, I don't see any problems besides this typo.

Oops!

> BTW do you plan to implement other rules besides this in the future?
> E.g. we currently miss this:
> 'x < y' is `true` if `max(x) < min(y)`; and `false` if `min(x) >= max(y)`
> 'x > y', 'x <= y', etc. in a similar way.

I think these cases need to be specialized as well. As, they aren't returning some complex RangeSet, so we can get away with a specialized template for `BO_LT/BO_GT` etc., instead of a class method (like `BO_Rem` has). I can work on this.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D106102/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D106102