Charusso added a comment. In D62926#1539191 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926#1539191>, @NoQ wrote:
> All right, it seems that i'm completely misunderstanding this problem and > we've been talking past each other this whole time. > > The problem is not that we need to skip the `CXXConstructExpr`. The problem > is that we need to skip `CXXNewExpr` (!!). CFG elements for an operator-new > call go like this: I really wanted to create a generic approach without any overhead. I have added the proper test case what is going on: we enter into another contexts and that should be modeled properly. I was not sure about how to do so, but after a while it has been born. It contains all of your ideas from all the comments and now we only bypassing CXXNewExprs. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D62926 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
