aaron.ballman added a comment. In D130055#3683822 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130055#3683822>, @jkorous wrote:
> In D130055#3683173 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130055#3683173>, @aaron.ballman > wrote: > >> Are there circumstances where we cannot "simply" infer this from the >> constructor itself? (After instantiation) we know the class hierarchy, we >> know the data members, and we know the ctor init list/in-class initializers, >> so it seems like we should be able to recursively mark a constructor as yolo >> for the user rather than making them write it themselves. > > The init list can be in a different translation unit (TU) which means we > can't compute all properties just from the code in current TU. (Unless we > decide to pessimistically consider such unanalyzable constructors as > non-initializing.) I was imagining that this analysis is most powerful when done as a cross-TU static analysis pass. However, having markings for when there's less context is definitely a benefit, so that's a great point. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130055/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130055 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
