On Fri, 2020-01-10 at 12:18 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > On Fri, 2020-01-10 at 09:10 -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-01-08 at 04:02 -0500, David Malcolm wrote: > > > Jeff's initial review of v1 of this patch: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg00813.html > > > I've addressed most of the issues he raised there. > > > TODO: should some structs be classes? > > > > > > Changed in v5: > > > - update ChangeLog path > > > - updated copyright years to include 2020 > > > > > > Changed in v4: > > > - Remove /// comment lines > > > - Don't use multiple inheritance, instead adding a log_user member. > > > - Add more validation, part of: > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-11/msg02517.html > > > - Generalize rewind_info_t to exploded_edge::custom_info_t > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-12/msg00219.html > > > - Add DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN (exploded_node); > > > - Add DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN (exploded_edge); > > > - Add DISABLE_COPY_AND_ASSIGN (exploded_graph); > > > > > > This patch adds exploded_graph and related classes, for managing > > > exploring paths through the user's code as a directed graph > > > of <point, state> pairs. > > > > > > gcc/analyzer/ChangeLog: > > > * exploded-graph.h: New file. > > So I'm not going to insist on the struct/class change. It was > > something I wanted you self-review and consider. If you end up > > changing them, consider that pre-approved. > > Jeff: sorry, just to clarify, is that an "OK" for the patch? > (given how much needed fixing in the earlier version). Yes, the patch is OK. Sorry I wasn't clear.
jeff >
