mgrang added a comment. In D78853#2003866 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D78853#2003866>, @efriedma wrote:
> Please don't add null checks for pointers that can't be null. It makes the > code slower and harder to understand. And least one of the checks you added > is actively breaking the code. > > In some cases, the analysis is pointing to cases where the code could be made > more clear for both humans and machines with some refactoring or assertions. > Patches welcome, but please make sure any assertions properly explain the > invariant. And please split the patches up a bit more; adding assertions for > complex invariants in ten different unrelated places is more than I really > want to review at once. > > (Also, a reminder, please post patches with full context.) Thanks @efriedma. Will split up the patches into smaller chunks and also post with full context. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D78853/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D78853 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
