Szelethus added a comment. One of the things that stood out for me was the lack of the usage of the `check::BranchCondition` callback, but there you'd have to grind out whether it is relevant to a return value, so I'm probably wrong on that regard.
So I guess I don't have any immediate high level objections. Using a recursive statement visitor seems overkill, but maybe its appropriate here, and lets leave that discussion for later anyways. Overriding `CheckerBase::printState` to show the current set of values stored in `CalledFunctionDataMap` would be nice sometime, but that can wait as well. @NoQ, @xazax.hun, @baloghadamsoftware, how do you like this patch? I think the high level idea is correct. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72705 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
