njames93 marked an inline comment as done. njames93 added a comment. In D71980#1799437 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71980#1799437>, @xazax.hun wrote:
> Thanks for working on this, please see one of my concerns inline. > > If you are trying to fix this problem, alternatively, you could also fix it > in Clang. > > Richard outlined the best possible way to solve this class of errors by > introducing a new type of AST node in: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46234 I'm going to look into adding a DiscardedStmt, see how that goes. would probably be best just creating a new Stmt rather than trying to inherit from NullStmt. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/BranchCloneCheck.cpp:62 Finder->addMatcher( - ifStmt(stmt().bind("if"), + ifStmt(unless(allOf(isConstexpr(), isInTemplateInstantiation())), + stmt().bind("if"), ---------------- xazax.hun wrote: > Why do we care if we are inside a template instantiation? > > Couldn't we trigger the bug with something like: > ``` > void shouldPass() { > if constexpr (constexprFun(1) == 0) { > handle(0); > } else if constexpr (constexprFun(1) == 1) { > handle(1); > } else { > handle(2); > } > } > ``` > > ? We are disabling the bug check when we are in a template instantiation. Reason being the template instantiation folds away the false branches to null statements which is the cause of the false positives. Also if there is a bug in a templated if constexpr, it will be caught when the template is defined. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71980/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71980 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
