Szelethus added inline comments.
================ Comment at: include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.h:146-149 +/// If you'd like to add a new -cc1 flag, add it to +/// include/clang/Driver/CC1Options.td, add a new field to store the value of +/// that flag in this class, and initialize it in +/// lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp. ---------------- NoQ wrote: > Nono, don't add more -cc1 flags :) Code review is there to stop adding unnecessary -cc1 flags. Are we sure we wouldn't even like to document it? I myself will add at least 2 more -cc1 flags in the future (-analyzer-config-help, -analyzer-checker-option-help), that undoubtedly belong there. ================ Comment at: lib/StaticAnalyzer/Core/AnalyzerOptions.cpp:172 + .getAsInteger(10, *V); + assert(!HasFailed && "analyzer-config option should be numeric"); + (void)HasFailed; ---------------- NoQ wrote: > I guess @xazax.hun's comment also applies to this assert. Which is sadly only going to be addressed in followup patches :/ Note that I merely moved code around in this patch, but have organized things in a way that emitting proper diagnostics will be super easy going forward. Since analyzer configs are mainly meant for developers, I think this is acceptable before I fix it (in any case, it has always been like this). https://reviews.llvm.org/D53483 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
