xazax.hun added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33191#756174, @NoQ wrote:
> @Gábor: I didn't want to bother you with this, but i'm not entirely sure > about how to deal with these false positives; since you're the original > author of this check, if you see anything obviously wrong here please comment > on me :) I do not see anything obviously wrong. Of course this approach is very conservative, but in order to do it less conservatively probably we would need to store the type information separately for every type argument. Converting to that approach would be a lot of work, and it might make the check more complex. https://reviews.llvm.org/D33191 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
