Details
- Reviewers
steakhal vsavchenko NoQ Szelethus
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Unit Tests
Event Timeline
Yay, great, thanks!
Can you add a test as well? We have a few in test/Analysis/exploded-graph-rewriter/ where we test parts of the emitted html.
Do you happen to have a screenshot of how it looks?
We have a few in test/Analysis/exploded-graph-rewriter/ where we test parts of the emitted html.
And they're now failing on the pre-merge buildbots. So i guess updating existing tests would already be nice.
- Rebase on top of the newest version of the dependent patch
- Draw borders for the table of the disequality info
- Add tests
Do you happen to have a screenshot of how it looks?
Yes! :)
I've added borders to the tables in the Disequality Info section, because the default rendering makes it hard to notice if there are multiple disequivalent classes attached to one class (see the second pics).
WDYT about the following format:
Equality constraints: reg_$0<a> == reg_$1<b> == reg_$2<c> Disequality constraints: reg_$0<a> != reg_$3<d>, != reg_$4<e>
Comma is a bit hard to notice but otherwise kinda nicely readable?
IMHO this format would be confusing if you have two SVals that include comparison operators:
E.g. SVal1 (reg_$1<int b>) == (reg_$2<int c>) and SVal2 (reg_$0<int a>) != 42. They might be in the same equivalence class, that would result this format:
Equality constraints: (reg_$1<int b>) == (reg_$2<int c>) == (reg_$0<int a>) != 42
Well, ... I know the current table with the borders looks a bit rough and ugly, but I think the information is displayed in an obvious way and can be interpreted unambiguously.
We could color the special ==/!= 50% gray and/or replace it with a non-programming symbol such as ≃ and ≄.
I believe that enumerate is more idiomatic for Python in situations like this.