vsavchenko marked 2 inline comments as done. vsavchenko added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/NullabilityChecker.cpp:521 + // Annotations that we want to consider make sense only for types. + auto Region = dyn_cast_or_null<TypedValueRegion>(Location.getAsRegion()); + if (!Region) ---------------- NoQ wrote: > [[ > https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-auto-type-deduction-to-make-code-more-readable > | Too much `auto` ]]! But this auto is also fine IMO as you can clearly see the actual type in the RHS. Mb `const auto *Region` at least? ================ Comment at: clang/lib/StaticAnalyzer/Checkers/NullabilityChecker.cpp:537 + // be considered non-null as annotated by the developer. + if (auto NewState = State->assume(*StoredVal, true)) { + Context.addTransition(NewState); ---------------- NoQ wrote: > Ok, so we're continuing normally if the value is already known to have been > assigned to null. We could sink the analysis instead but presumably it's not > our job as another checker must have warned before we get there (let's > comment about this maybe). Sure! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D77722/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D77722 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
