vsavchenko added a comment. In D95877#2548021 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95877#2548021>, @RedDocMD wrote:
> In D95877#2547949 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95877#2547949>, @vsavchenko > wrote: > >> I think we had a bit of misunderstanding about the test. It still should >> pass (we can't have broken tests, it will disrupt CI bots). Try to put the >> test case, so it is THERE and you CHANGE the expected outcome when the >> analyzer behaves correctly. Right now, as I see above, the test crashes. > > Actually, that is the reason why I initially had commented out the crashing > test. Until `reinterpret_cast` is properly handled, the test will crash due > to an assertion failure, irrespective of what is put as the expected outcome. > Is there a way to flag that a test should crash? (I see that after the tests > are run, there is an expectedly-failed category). The crash is caused when > the static analyzer tries to evaluate `base.*bf`. Yes, it'd be better to extract this case into a separate file and mark it as XFAIL Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95877/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95877 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
