NoQ added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/UnsafeBufferUsage.cpp:50 + M.addMatcher( + stmt(forEachDescendant( + stmt( ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > Errr, this looks expensive to me, but maybe I'm forgetting (I can't recall if > it's ancestor or descendant that's more expensive, I think it's ancestor > though). @njames93 @LegalizeAdulthood @klimek @sammccall -- do you have > concerns here or know of a better approach? I added some speculation to the other comment (https://reviews.llvm.org/D137346?id=472987#inline-1342220) - I think we're going to be fast and safe as long as this other thing gets implemented. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137346/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137346 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
