martong added a comment. Very good!
In D129498#3650595 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498#3650595>, @NoQ wrote: > In D129498#3647348 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498#3647348>, @ASDenysPetrov > wrote: > >> In D129498#3644222 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498#3644222>, @NoQ wrote: >> >>> Maybe `clang_analyzer_range()` instead? >> >> This was its first name. I refused. First, because it emits concrete >> integers as well and moreover we can extend it for arrays or strings e.g. >> Second, the ranges is just an implementation detail and an actual thing we >> want to see is an associated value. > > Ok how about `clang_analyzer_constraint()`? A concrete value could be thought > of as constraint, and so can be range, or anything else any exotic constraint > managers may decide to dump. We associate a value to a variable even if that is unconstrained. That value is the whole range of the variable's type. In this sense, I vote for `clang_analyzer_value`. ================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/ConstraintManager.h:126 + virtual void printRange(raw_ostream &Out, ProgramStateRef State, + SymbolRef Sym) {} ---------------- `printValue` would be more general than `printRange` which is unique for the range based constraint manager. ================ Comment at: clang/test/Analysis/print-ranges.cpp:1 +// RUN: %clang_analyze_cc1 -analyzer-checker=core,debug.ExprInspection -analyzer-config eagerly-assume=false -verify %s +// REQUIRES: no-z3 ---------------- Don't forget to pin the target/triple. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D129498 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
