steakhal added a comment. In D84316#2233368 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316#2233368>, @Szelethus wrote:
> Do I sense correctly that the only information `CSrtingLengthModeling.cpp` > requires from the actual `CStringChecker` is a checker tag? AFAIK yes. > [...] it seems like we're legalizing bloating checkers instead of separating > them. I agree. I would genuinely have a modeling checker, and a completely different checker using the modeled information, let's call it CStringcChecker. Unfortunately, that approach was not really well received - probably needs further discussion. > Also, this patch seems to have a significant overlap with D84979 > <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84979> -- is this intentional? It is. In fact, this patch prepares the code for it. I wanted to separate large code motion changes (like this one) from API refactoring changes (like D84979 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84979> does). So in some sense, these two patches are hand in hand. Have a look at them ;) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
