[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

NoQ marked 11 inline comments as done. NoQ added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter/BugReporter.h:75 /// individual bug reports. class BugReport : public llvm::ilist_node { public: gribozavr wrote: > Szelethus wrot

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

gribozavr added a comment. Sorry for the silly comments, but my main point is, I guess, that I don't quite understand the design towards which you are refactoring, and to meaningfully review patches I need to be on the same page. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

Szelethus added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter/BugReporter.h:75 /// individual bug reports. class BugReport : public llvm::ilist_node { public: Shouldn't we make this an abstract class? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACT

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

NoQ marked an inline comment as done. NoQ added inline comments. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter/BugReporter.h:223 + using visitor_iterator = VisitorList::iterator; + using visitor_range = llvm::iterator_range; + Szelethus wrote

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

Szelethus added a comment. You got me convinced. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter/BugReporter.h:223 + using visitor_iterator = VisitorList::iterator; + using visitor_range = llvm::iterator_range; + I think I added a visitor ran

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

NoQ added a comment. In D66572#1640518 , @Szelethus wrote: > Super high level question: `CheckerManager` knows whether a checker, and I > suspect a checker callback is path sensitive or not, do you think we can > automate this decision (whether the bug r

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

Szelethus added a comment. Super high level question: `CheckerManager` knows whether a checker, and I suspect a checker callback is path sensitive or not, do you think we can automate this decision (whether the bug report is path sensitive of syntactic)? For the purposes of clang-tidy, can we s

[PATCH] D66572: [analyzer] BugReporter Separation Ep.I.

NoQ marked 6 inline comments as done. NoQ added a comment. Most of the patch is boring but here are a few places that i wanted attract attention to. Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/BugReporter/BugReporter.h:225 + +protected: + /// The ExplodedGraph node a