vsk added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/CodeGen/CoverageMappingGen.cpp:942
pushRegion(Counter::getZero());
- auto &ZeroRegion = getRegion();
- ZeroRegion.setDeferred(true);
- LastTerminatedRegion = {EndLoc, RegionStack.size()};
+ if (!HasTerminateStmt) {
+ auto &ZeroRegion = getRegion();
----------------
zequanwu wrote:
> vsk wrote:
> > What's supposed to be the difference between the zero region pushed after a
> > `return;` vs. after a `break;`?
> What I think is `DeferredRegion` is only used for `break;` and `continue`.
> Other terminate statements like `return;`, `throw` etc will use the logic in
> `VisitStmt` to emit gap region. So, I added this condition to separate the
> two cases.
What do you think of the notion of using the gaps inserted in VisitStmt to
replace the whole deferred region system? Is it something that might be
feasible (if perhaps out of scope for this patch), or do you see a fundamental
reason it can't/shouldn't be done?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97101/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97101
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
