| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
When an object's class provides no destructor, it's less important to
materialize that object properly because we don't have to model the destructor
correctly, so previously we skipped the support for these syntax patterns.
Additionally, fix support for construction contexts of "static temporaries"
(temporaries that are lifetime-extended by static references) because
it turned out that we only had tests for them without destructors, which caused
us to regress when we re-introduced the construction context for such
temporaries.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47658
llvm-svn: 335796
|
|
|
Adjustments should be considered properly; we should copy the unadjusted object
over the whole temporary base region. If the unadjusted object is no longer
available in the Environment, invalidate the temporary base region, and then
copy the adjusted object into the adjusted sub-region of the temporary region.
This fixes a regression introduced by r288263, that caused various
false positives, due to copying only adjusted object into the adjusted region;
the rest of the base region therefore remained undefined.
Before r288263, the adjusted value was copied over the unadjusted region,
which is incorrect, but accidentally worked better due to how region store
disregards compound value bindings to non-base regions.
An additional test machinery is introduced to make sure that despite making
two binds, we only notify checkers once for both of them, without exposing
the partially copied objects.
This fix is a hack over a hack. The proper fix would be to model C++ temporaries
in the CFG, and after that dealing with adjustments would no longer be
necessary, and the values we need would no longer disappear from the
Environment.
rdar://problem/30658168
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30534
llvm-svn: 298924
|
