Fix bug in ConditionBRVisitor where for C++ (and not C) we were not ignoring
implicit pointer-to-boolean conversions in condition expressions. This would
result in inconsistent diagnostic emission between C and C++.
A consequence of this is now ConditionBRVisitor and TrackConstraintBRVisitor may
emit redundant diagnostics, for example:
"Assuming pointer value is null" (TrackConstraintBRVisitor)
"Assuming 'p' is null" (ConditionBRVisitor)
We need to reconcile the two, and perhaps prefer one over the other in some
cases.
git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/cfe/trunk@163372 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8
diff --git a/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp b/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
index 17034b9..b95ec98 100644
--- a/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
+++ b/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
}
void test_ic_null(TestInstanceCall *p) {
- if (!p) // expected-note {{Assuming pointer value is null}} expected-note {{Taking true branch}}
+ if (!p) // expected-note {{Assuming pointer value is null}} expected-note {{Assuming 'p' is null}} expected-note {{Taking true branch}}
p->foo(); // expected-warning {{Called C++ object pointer is null}} expected-note{{Called C++ object pointer is null}}
}
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
}
void test_cast(const TestInstanceCall *p) {
- if (!p) // expected-note {{Assuming pointer value is null}} expected-note {{Taking true branch}}
+ if (!p) // expected-note {{Assuming pointer value is null}} expected-note {{Assuming 'p' is null}} expected-note {{Taking true branch}}
const_cast<TestInstanceCall *>(p)->foo(); // expected-warning {{Called C++ object pointer is null}} expected-note {{Called C++ object pointer is null}}
}