This check is also accessible through the debug.ExprInspection checker.
Like clang_analyzer_eval, you can use it to test the analyzer engine's
current state; the argument should be true or false to indicate whether or
not you expect the function to be inlined.
When used in the positive case (clang_analyzer_checkInlined(true)), the
analyzer prints the message "TRUE" if the function is ever inlined. However,
clang_analyzer_checkInlined(false) should never print a message; this asserts
that there should be no paths on which the current function is inlined, but
then there are no paths on which to print a message! (If the assertion is
violated, the message "FALSE" will be printed.)
This asymmetry comes from the fact that the only other chance to print a
message is when the function is analyzed as a top-level function. However,
when we do that, we can't be sure it isn't also inlined elsewhere (such as
in a recursive function, or if we want to analyze in both general or
specialized cases). Rather than have all checkInlined calls have an appended,
meaningless "FALSE" or "TOP-LEVEL" case, there is just no message printed.
void clang_analyzer_checkInlined(int);
For debugging purposes only!
llvm-svn: 161708
The new debug.ExprInspection checker looks for calls to clang_analyzer_eval,
and emits a warning of TRUE, FALSE, or UNKNOWN (or UNDEFINED) based on the
constrained value of its (boolean) argument. It does not modify the analysis
state though the conditions tested can result in branches (e.g. through the
use of short-circuit operators).
llvm-svn: 156919
Jordan Rose