NoQ added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Analysis/IssueHash.h:35 +/// /// In case a new hash is introduced, the old one should still be maintained for /// a while. One should not introduce a new hash for every change, it is ---------------- Szelethus wrote: > gribozavr wrote: > > I don't understand what this paragraph is talking about at all. What does > > it mean for a new hash to be introduced? As in, when this hashing algorithm > > changes? > It might refer to the extreme headaches issue hash changes can cause. In > D77866,a block of comments in `MallocChecker.cpp` talks about this, and some > other discussion (D77866#2068394) in the patch as well. This paragraph was saying that if a different hashing algorithm is introduced (eg., `GetIssueHashV2()`), the old one should still be maintained for backwards compatibility. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67421/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67421 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
