NoQ accepted this revision. NoQ added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM, thank you for the fix! > I not familiar with Objective-C++, can you provide a appropriate test about > Objective-C++ for me, thank you! Now that the explicit check and the respective code path is removed, i don't think we should explicitly test it. > And I'm not a native speaker of English Same here, i guess. ================ Comment at: test/Analysis/_Bool-increment-decrement.c:1-2 +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-store=region -verify -std=c99 -Dbool=_Bool -Dtrue=1 -Dfalse=0 %s +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-store=region -verify -std=c11 -Dbool=_Bool -Dtrue=1 -Dfalse=0 %s +extern void clang_analyzer_eval(bool); ---------------- We don't write `-analyzer-store=region` these days because that's the default value and it's unlikely that anybody would ever care. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D43741 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
