NoQ added a comment. > We could work around that by invalidating object contents every time we > detect something fishy. The only reasonable detection i can come up with > would be to detect if we have a coinciding binding (i.e. what the assertion > was previously protecting us from), eg.: > > if (B.getDefaultBinding(R) || B.getDirectBinding(R)) > V = UnknownVal(); > > > This detection is imperfect - there are tests that would still fail. In > particular it won't fix the `ASTRecordLayout` problem. And i also suspect > that it really destroys a lot more good data than bad data. So i'll be > experimenting with that now. In the current version of the patch i remove the > special case handling and simply bind the default value blindly even if i > know that `RegionStore` can't handle it precisely.
Committed as is for now. Didn't notice any difference between the three approaches on my C++ testing grounds. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D46368 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
