Szelethus added a comment.

The fix is great, thank you so much! The test seems to be annoying, it might be 
worth looking into it some other time, but that is definitely orthogonal to 
this patch.



================
Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PlistDiagnostics.cpp:1211-1212
 
-      while (
-          !(ParenthesesDepth == 1 &&
-            (CurrParamII == __VA_ARGS__II ? false : TheTok.is(tok::comma)))) {
+      while (CurrParamII == VariadicParamII || ParenthesesDepth != 1 ||
+             !TheTok.is(tok::comma)) {
         assert(TheTok.isNot(tok::eof) &&
----------------
That looks so much better.


================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/plist-macros-with-expansion.cpp:529-531
 // FIXME: Stringify and escape __VA_ARGS__ correctly.
 // CHECK: <key>name</key><string>STRINGIFIED_VA_ARGS</string>
 // CHECK-NEXT: <key>expansion</key><string>variadicCFunction(x, 
&quot;Additional supply depots required.&quot;, &quot;)&quot;;x = 0;</string>
----------------
These FileCheck lines are great, because the plist file on its own is not very 
readable, could you include them for the new test as well? Side note, we're 
already thinking that removing the plist file might be a good idea (its a mess 
to keep up-to-date, and doesn't test all that much).


================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/plist-macros-with-expansion.cpp:536
+  do {                       \
+  } while (0)
+
----------------
chrish_ericsson_atx wrote:
> Seems the do {} while (0) idiom is a problem, because the plist output gets 
> formatted differently on windows than it does on Linux.   (Extra space).  
Oh that is a real shame, we absolutely shouldn't do that! Can we somehow 
provoke a warning through some other way? (null pointer dereference)


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D87942/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D87942

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to