steakhal added a comment.
Let me come back to this once again in the upcoming days to make sure
everything is good.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/pr22954.c:581
clang_analyzer_eval(m27.s3[i] == 1); // expected-warning{{UNKNOWN}}\
expected-warning{{Potential leak of memory pointed to by 'm27.s4'}}
return 0;
----------------
OikawaKirie wrote:
> Do I need to update all other leak expectation directions in this file as
> well? Such as this one here.
Definitely no.
Its not advised to have different, but similar looking hunks out of which some
are the consequence of the semantic change we made and also have others where
they are just refactors.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152435/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D152435
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
