xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CallEvent.h:116
+ const bool Foreign = false; // From CTU.
+
----------------
martong wrote:
> martong wrote:
> > xazax.hun wrote:
> > > I feel that we use different terms for the imported declarations.
> > > Sometimes we call them `new`, sometimes `imported`, sometimes `foreign`.
> > > In case all of these means the same thing, it would be nice to
> > > standardize on a single way of naming. If there is a subtle difference
> > > between them, let's document that in a comment. It would be nice if we
> > > did not need the comment after the declaration but it would be obvious
> > > from the variable name.
> > Yes, I agree that this should deserver some more explanation. Maybe right
> > above this declaration?
> >
> > So, `new` means that a declaration is **created** newly by the ASTImporter.
> > `imported` means it has been imported, but not necessarily `new`. Think
> > about this case, we import `foo`'s definition.
> > ```
> > // to.cpp
> > void bar() {} // from a.h
> > // from.cpp
> > void bar() {} // from a.h
> > void foo() {
> > bar();
> > }
> > ```
> > Then `foo` will be `new` and `imported`, `bar` will be `imported` and not
> > `new`.
> > `foreign` basically means `imported` and `new`.
> I've just added an explanatory comment for this field.
Foreign means new and imported. But is there a way for a declaration to be new
and not to be imported? If no, in that case it feels like new and foreign are
actually the same and we should standardize on a single name.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123773/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D123773
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
