HazardyKnusperkeks reopened this revision. HazardyKnusperkeks added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
In D115060#3219116 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115060#3219116>, @curdeius wrote: > @HazardyKnusperkeks, it *seems* as if this commit (or one of others indicated > on Changes tab of the link below) provoked failures in ASan. But it could be > something else. > https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/5/builds/16734 > Could you have a look? Okay, I don't have access to ASAN or so, I'm using MinGW on Windows. But I suspect it is the Assignment of the `PreviousLine` since this is not existent every time. So I see the following solutions: 1. Only name `NextLine`, and use `I[-1]`. 2. `const auto HasPreviousLine = I != AnnotatedLines.begin(); const auto &PreviousLine = HasPreviousLine ? *I[-1] : *I;` which is safe, since `PreviousLine` is only used if `HasPreviousLine` is true, but is a bit confusing. It would get an explaining comment. 3. Rearrange the statements so that we can have only one check if there is a previous line and define `PreviousLine` inside that `if`. It remains to be seen if that's NFC. I would prefer option 3, but if that would change the behavior would go for option 2. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115060/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115060 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
