samestep added a comment. In D130306#3676672 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130306#3676672>, @xazax.hun wrote:
> Thanks! Knowing the context, I am much happier with the direction overall. Is > the plan to analyze a mock of std::optional instead of the actual code in the > STL? How will that mock be shipped? Would that be embedded in the binary? Glad to hear it! Yes, the current plan is to analyze a mock of `std::optional` instead of the actual type. One reason for this is that we would like to use the same mock to model multiple different `optional` types (e.g. `absl::optional`) using the same mock. Our current plan is to embed it directly in the binary. > Overall, I am excited for context-sensitive analysis, and some of my concerns > are addressed. Looking forward to the follow-up patches :) Thanks Gábor! I'll let @ymandel and others respond to your other points; also, thanks for the links, those resources look very helpful. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130306/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130306 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
