[PATCH] D155547: [analyzer] Model lifetime of a variable declared in for condition in CFG correctly

Wed Jul 19 06:59:55 PDT 2023

tomasz-kaminski-sonarsource marked 2 inline comments as done.
tomasz-kaminski-sonarsource added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/lifetime-cfg-output.cpp:1
 // RUN: %clang_cc1 -fcxx-exceptions -fexceptions -analyze -analyzer-checker=debug.DumpCFG -analyzer-config cfg-lifetime=true,cfg-temporary-dtors=false,cfg-rich-constructors=false -analyzer-config cfg-implicit-dtors=false %s > %t 2>&1
 // RUN: FileCheck --input-file=%t %s
----------------
xazax.hun wrote:
> steakhal wrote:
> > tomasz-kaminski-sonarsource wrote:
> > > @xazax.hun 
> > > A side question, this test disables `cfg-temporary-dtors`, `cfg-rich-constructors`, and `cfg-implicit-dtors` that are enabled by default for the analyzer. 
> > > This was done because our changes [[ https://reviews.llvm.org/D153273 | D153273 ]] these functionalities were incompatible, and there were assertions triggering.
> > > I would like to update the test to just enable `cfg-lifetime` similarly to what `cfg-scopes` do, so we catch any regressions, however, we will not test this functionality alone.
> > > Is this something you (upstream) would accept? If so I can create NFC patch.
> > Makes sense to me.
> Sounds good to me.
This is https://reviews.llvm.org/D155694.

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D155547/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D155547