xazax.hun accepted this revision.
xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Analysis/FlowSensitive/DataflowEnvironment.cpp:185
+ // base classes, because they are not visible in derived classes.
+ getFieldsFromClassHierarchy(Base.getType(), /*IgnorePrivateFields=*/true,
+ Fields);
----------------
ymandel wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > Will this work well for all cases of diamond shape inheritance?
> >
> > E.g.:
> > ```
> > struct A { int a; };
> > struct B : virtual A { int b; };
> > struct C : virtual A { int c; };
> > struct D : B, C { int d; };
> > ```
> >
> > In the above code, I would expect the field `a` to appear only once. I
> > guess this should work well because of the set representation although we
> > will visit A twice.
> >
> > On the other hand, consider:
> > ```
> > struct A { int a; };
> > struct B : A { int b; };
> > struct C : A { int c; };
> > struct D : B, C { int d; };
> > ```
> >
> > Here, in fact, we have 2 instances of the field `a`. Both `B::a` and `C::a`
> > are part of `D`. I suspect that the current implementation might not handle
> > this.
> Good point, no. But, I'm not sure that fixing this here would be enough - I
> think we'd also need to revisit how we model structs, since `getChild` takes
> a decl as argument -- it doesn't support multiple versions of the same field
> decl.
>
> I added a FIXME since this seems a larger issue, but let me know if you think
> it needs fixing now.
I think the argument of `getChild` needs fixing as well is strong enough to
push this to a separate PR.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122273/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D122273
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
