NoQ marked an inline comment as done.
NoQ added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/ExprEngineCXX.cpp:494
if (State != Pred->getState()) {
+ assert(CE && "Inherited constructors do not have construction contexts!");
static SimpleProgramPointTag T("ExprEngine",
----------------
Charusso wrote:
> baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> > martong wrote:
> > > `CIE` ?
> > No. `CE`. Since inherited constructors do not have construction contexts,
> > `State` is the same for `CIE` as the previous `State`. Thus if they are
> > different, we are facing a `CE`.
> This assertion has been removed intentionally?
Yup. I think this isn't a valuable assertion because (1) the invariant it
documents ("inherited constructors don't require additional tracking in the
program state so far") is accidental rather than intentional (we may add other
kinds of tracking later) and (2) the code behaves reasonably well even if the
assertion fails (given that i replaced `CE` with `E` in the `generateNode`
invocation).
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D74735/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D74735
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
