etienneb added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D19451#410014, @Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> Please mention this check in docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (in alphabetical order). > > Will check catch more complicated cases, like > > if ((Point1.x < Point2.x) && (Point1.x < Point2.x)) ? It is catching these cases. > Will be good idea to add such cases in test. I can add it as a test, no prob. I'm never against more tests. I have more cases implemented, but I prefer landing this piece by piece to let people review it and report false-positive. I'm able to recognize stuff like: x == 10 && x <= 12 (x <= 12 is redundant), and many other cases with bitwise operations. I need time to deal correctly with False positives. And, I'm not sure it will be part of the same matcher. Will see.. http://reviews.llvm.org/D19451 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
