RedDocMD added a comment. In D103750#2825342 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103750#2825342>, @NoQ wrote:
> In D103750#2823741 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103750#2823741>, @RedDocMD > wrote: > >> I would suppose that constructor calls are properly handled. (ie, member >> constructors are called properly). > > Do the above tests pass when your new `evalCall` modeling is enabled? The analyzer doesn't seem to be able to make up its mind. member-constructor.cpp:15:5: warning: FALSE [debug.ExprInspection] clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ member-constructor.cpp:15:25: note: Assuming the condition is false clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~ member-constructor.cpp:15:5: note: FALSE clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ member-constructor.cpp:15:5: warning: TRUE [debug.ExprInspection] clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ member-constructor.cpp:15:25: note: Assuming the condition is true clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~ member-constructor.cpp:15:5: note: TRUE clang_analyzer_eval(*P->p == 0); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2 warnings generated. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D103750/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D103750 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
