NoQ accepted this revision.
NoQ added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
> @NoQ @baloghadamsoftware Escapes are more within your realm of expertise.
> Anything to add?
This looks like a fairly standard approach to take, no objections.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/StreamChecker.cpp:952-954
+ for (InvalidatedSymbols::const_iterator I = Escaped.begin(),
+ E = Escaped.end();
+ I != E; ++I) {
----------------
balazske wrote:
> Szelethus wrote:
> > Foreach?
> The foreach type loop does work too, will be updated (this code is taken from
> another checker).
> this code is taken from another checker
We were only allowed to use C++11 in LLVM very recently. Most of our code was
written before that happened.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80699/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D80699
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
