samsonov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/ubsan/ubsan_handlers.cc:57-58
@@ -57,2 +56,4 @@
+ if (!Pointer) {
+ R.setErrorType(ErrorType::NullPointerUse);
Diag(Loc, DL_Error, "%0 null pointer of type %1")
<< TypeCheckKinds[Data->TypeCheckKind] << Data->Type;
----------------
rsmith wrote:
> samsonov wrote:
> > rsmith wrote:
> > > Can we pass the error type to `Diag` in the place of `DL_Error` instead
> > > of specifying it separately?
> > We still need error type somewhere outside `Diag`, because it will be used
> > later when we print (or not print) summary, after several `Diag`
> > invocations (for DL_Error and DL_Note).
> We would make exactly one invocation to `Diag` with an error type, wouldn't
> we? Is the summary information computed separately from diagnostic emission?
The answer to last question is "yes". `Diag` object prints the diagnostic
message in destructor (and there can be several `Diag` objects). We need to
print summary information after all the diagnostics (DL_Error and DL_Note), so
we do this in `ScopedReport` destructor.
There is a different benefit in passing error kind to Diag() object - we can
print the actual error kind instead of generic `runtime error:` line, but
that's a different problem, which can probably be addressed afterwards.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D12215
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
