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

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions

diff --git a/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp b/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
index 17034b9b00..b95ec98ec8 100644
--- a/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
+++ b/test/Analysis/method-call-path-notes.cpp
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ void test_ic_set_to_null() {
 }
 
 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_ic_member_ptr() {
 }
 
 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}}
 }