xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang/include/clang/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DataflowAnalysisContext.h:41
+ ///
+ /// `Slvr` must not be null.
+ DataflowAnalysisContext(std::unique_ptr<Solver> Slvr)
----------------
ymandel wrote:
> I think `S` would be easier to read.
Initially, I was wondering if we want to make the solver optional to
potentially speed up analyses that do not need this capability. But I realized,
we could just pass in a dummy no-op solver in those cases so this should be ok.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DataflowEnvironment.h:247
+ BoolValue &makeAnd(BoolValue &LHS, BoolValue &RHS) {
+ return &LHS == &RHS ? LHS : DACtx->getOrCreateConjunctionValue(LHS, RHS);
+ }
----------------
Should we move this check to `DataflowAnalysisContext` to protect against cases
where users inadvertently try to call the its methods directly instead of using
the `Environment`?
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DataflowAnalysisContext.cpp:30
+
+ It = ConjunctionVals.find({&RHS, &LHS});
+ if (It != ConjunctionVals.end())
----------------
Alternatively, we could canonicalize `BoolValue`s, e.g. always having the
operand with the smaller address on the left. This could help us doing one less
lookup (at the cost of a pointer comparison and sometimes a swap).
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D120711/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D120711
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
