Szelethus added a comment. In D64991#1596292 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64991#1596292>, @NoQ wrote:
> In D64991#1595853 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64991#1595853>, @Szelethus wrote: > > > `CFGElementRef` > > > Wait, is it a thing already?? Did i miss anything??? Oh, yea, I have it locally, still need to iron out a couple things on that before daring to upload it :) I figured it wouldn't cause much confusion so I shared this one kinda hanging in the air. >> This analysis isn't conservative enough yet, I really should include >> function calls with non-const references into the gen set, but hey, at this >> point I'm optimistic that it can be done. > > "Conservative" is not a property of the algorithm; it depends on how is the > algorithm used. For some purposes you'll want to add an extra definition when > you're not sure if it'll be a definition, for other purposes you'll want to > only have definitions in which you are 100% certain in the set. Aye I'll try to specify on that. Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64991/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64991 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
