Updating to use more range-based for loops, nullptr and auto. No functional changes.
llvm-svn: 206590
diff --git a/clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp b/clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp
index 63063e0..94d8e70 100644
--- a/clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Analysis/ThreadSafety.cpp
@@ -2420,23 +2420,22 @@
StringRef CapDiagKind = "mutex";
SourceLocation Loc = D->getLocation();
- for (unsigned i = 0; i < ArgAttrs.size(); ++i) {
- Attr *Attr = ArgAttrs[i];
+ for (const auto *Attr : ArgAttrs) {
Loc = Attr->getLocation();
- if (RequiresCapabilityAttr *A = dyn_cast<RequiresCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
+ if (const auto *A = dyn_cast<RequiresCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
getMutexIDs(A->isShared() ? SharedLocksToAdd : ExclusiveLocksToAdd, A,
0, D);
CapDiagKind = ClassifyDiagnostic(A);
- } else if (auto *A = dyn_cast<ReleaseCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
+ } else if (const auto *A = dyn_cast<ReleaseCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
// UNLOCK_FUNCTION() is used to hide the underlying lock implementation.
// We must ignore such methods.
if (A->args_size() == 0)
return;
// FIXME -- deal with exclusive vs. shared unlock functions?
- getMutexIDs(ExclusiveLocksToAdd, A, (Expr*) 0, D);
- getMutexIDs(LocksReleased, A, (Expr*) 0, D);
+ getMutexIDs(ExclusiveLocksToAdd, A, nullptr, D);
+ getMutexIDs(LocksReleased, A, nullptr, D);
CapDiagKind = ClassifyDiagnostic(A);
- } else if (auto *A = dyn_cast<AcquireCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
+ } else if (const auto *A = dyn_cast<AcquireCapabilityAttr>(Attr)) {
if (A->args_size() == 0)
return;
getMutexIDs(A->isShared() ? SharedLocksAcquired
@@ -2487,7 +2486,7 @@
PE = CurrBlock->pred_end(); PI != PE; ++PI) {
// if *PI -> CurrBlock is a back edge
- if (*PI == 0 || !VisitedBlocks.alreadySet(*PI))
+ if (*PI == nullptr || !VisitedBlocks.alreadySet(*PI))
continue;
int PrevBlockID = (*PI)->getBlockID();
@@ -2530,9 +2529,7 @@
// Process continue and break blocks. Assume that the lockset for the
// resulting block is unaffected by any discrepancies in them.
- for (unsigned SpecialI = 0, SpecialN = SpecialBlocks.size();
- SpecialI < SpecialN; ++SpecialI) {
- CFGBlock *PrevBlock = SpecialBlocks[SpecialI];
+ for (const auto *PrevBlock : SpecialBlocks) {
int PrevBlockID = PrevBlock->getBlockID();
CFGBlockInfo *PrevBlockInfo = &BlockInfo[PrevBlockID];
@@ -2628,17 +2625,14 @@
// by *-LOCK_FUNCTION and UNLOCK_FUNCTION. The intersect below will then
// issue the appropriate warning.
// FIXME: the location here is not quite right.
- for (unsigned i=0,n=ExclusiveLocksAcquired.size(); i<n; ++i) {
- ExpectedExitSet.addLock(FactMan, ExclusiveLocksAcquired[i],
+ for (const auto &Lock : ExclusiveLocksAcquired)
+ ExpectedExitSet.addLock(FactMan, Lock,
LockData(D->getLocation(), LK_Exclusive));
- }
- for (unsigned i=0,n=SharedLocksAcquired.size(); i<n; ++i) {
- ExpectedExitSet.addLock(FactMan, SharedLocksAcquired[i],
+ for (const auto &Lock : SharedLocksAcquired)
+ ExpectedExitSet.addLock(FactMan, Lock,
LockData(D->getLocation(), LK_Shared));
- }
- for (unsigned i=0,n=LocksReleased.size(); i<n; ++i) {
- ExpectedExitSet.removeLock(FactMan, LocksReleased[i]);
- }
+ for (const auto &Lock : LocksReleased)
+ ExpectedExitSet.removeLock(FactMan, Lock);
// FIXME: Should we call this function for all blocks which exit the function?
intersectAndWarn(ExpectedExitSet, Final->ExitSet,