NoQ added a comment. In D46421#1121080 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D46421#1121080>, @r.stahl wrote:
> It seems like a good idea to not do that, since non-const values are not > used. It might become useful if we ever do some kind of straight line > execution from static initialization to main. > However for structs it is enough if one of their fields is declared const. Aaand in C++ there's also the `mutable` keyword that can cancel the effect of the surrounding `const` keyword, at least for the purposes of precise memory contents modeling in `RegionStore`. The idea looks great to me. It was far from obvious to me that importing variables manually was necessary, nice catch. I definitely wish for a more direct test for this, i.e. "CTU analysis avoids that specific false positive due to the new functionality". CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D46421/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D46421 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
