[PATCH] D115907: [misexpect] Re-implement MisExpect Diagnostics

[Paul Kirth via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

paulkirth added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:1554
+              Twine(*Opts.DiagnosticsMisExpectTolerance), SA);
+
   for (StringRef Sanitizer : serializeSanitizerKinds(Opts.SanitizeRecover))
----------------
I really don't understand why this step is necessary, or why in my local builds omitting the call to `GenerateArgs` works at all. I only arrived at this change by noticing other options do the same, and this seemed to fix the issue with tests using the repro instructions from the precommit bots.

It seems a bit strange that Clang parses the option, stores it to a `CodeGenOption` then puts it back as a string argument to be parsed again later and put into the same data structure. Is this a result of an earlier architecture in Clang? if so, should we reconsider its design?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D115907/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D115907