steakhal wrote: > The change LGTM and I'm happy to hear that you're improving the handling of > compound values. I hope that these foundational improvements will help > further development of checkers that deal with structured data. (Perhaps even > the iterator checkers could be stabilized eventually...)
Yes, this would be awesome. Unfortunately, I fix one thing and that uncovers something else, and continues. That said there is a chance that I can't post them because with the areas where we would regress we would be worse off in the end in terms of FPs TPs. So, I might not fit in the sprint to stabilize these improvements and I'd need to switch tasks and pause these patches. Debugging LCVs and copy modeling is a time consuming work. I can't promise anything :s > On our downstream branch this commit breaks a few tests, but I think that > this just exposes faults of our internal-use checkers (which we'll update > eventually). Thanks for checking! Sorry for putting burden on you, and this is why I tried to motivate the change with a lengthy description. Hopefully they are also good source of learning. > By the way I think there is a typo in the PR description: the word "not" is > missing from the location where I marked it in brackets: > > > I should [not] have just blindly create an LCV by calling > > createLazyBinding(), but rather check if I can apply the shortcut > > (Also, "create" should be "created".) Thanks for spotting! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/116840 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
