[analyzer][NFC] Turn NodeBuilderContext into a class

[diego-est]

From issue #73088. I changed NodeBuilderContext into a class. Additionally, there were some other mentions of the former being a struct which I also changed into a class. This is my first time working with an issue so I will be open to hearing any advice or changes that need to be done.

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be
notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write
permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by
name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review
by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate
is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-static-analyzer-1

@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang

Author: Diego A. Estrada Rivera (diego-est)

Changes

From issue #73088. I changed NodeBuilderContext into a class. Additionally, there were some other mentions of the former being a struct which I also changed into a class. This is my first time working with an issue so I will be open to hearing any advice or changes that need to be done.

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84638.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CoreEngine.h (+3-2)

diff --git a/clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CoreEngine.h b/clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CoreEngine.h
index 8e392421fef9bb..24d4afc551355e 100644
--- a/clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CoreEngine.h
+++ b/clang/include/clang/StaticAnalyzer/Core/PathSensitive/CoreEngine.h
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ class CoreEngine {
   friend class ExprEngine;
   friend class IndirectGotoNodeBuilder;
   friend class NodeBuilder;
-  friend struct NodeBuilderContext;
+  friend class NodeBuilderContext;
   friend class SwitchNodeBuilder;
 
 public:
@@ -194,7 +194,8 @@ class CoreEngine {
 };
 
 // TODO: Turn into a class.
-struct NodeBuilderContext {
+class NodeBuilderContext {
+public:
   const CoreEngine &Eng;
   const CFGBlock *Block;
   const LocationContext *LC;

[steakhal]

Thanks for the PR.
I think it would make sense to not expose data members in a class' public api.
We might need some member functions along the way to make this possible.

[steakhal]

See my previous reply.

[diego-est]

I added the appropriate functions and moved the class members into private. Additionally I ran make check-all to make sure the now-private members wouldn't cause any issues with the rest of the codebase, all the checks passed.

[steakhal]

Alright. So we can simply mark all the members private. I was surprised a bit.
LGTM, but remove the TODO comment you fix.

[github-actions]

✅ With the latest revision this PR passed the C/C++ code formatter.

[diego-est]

Seems like it wasn't as easy as just making them private. I think I found all the places where there were private member accesses. The tests passed on my side again and the github-pull-requests action. The code_formatter action keeps failing because of the documentation on something I didn't touch (but seems to be fixed high upstream). Everything should be fixed now.

[github-actions]

@diego-est Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged into the LLVM Project!

Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then tested
by our build bots. If there is a problem with a build, you may recieve a report in an email or a comment on this PR.

Please check whether problems have been caused by your change specifically, as
the builds can include changes from many authors. It is not uncommon for your
change to be included in a build that fails due to someone else's changes, or
infrastructure issues.

How to do this, and the rest of the post-merge process, is covered in detail here.

If your change does cause a problem, it may be reverted, or you can revert it yourself.
This is a normal part of LLVM development. You can fix your changes and open a new PR to merge them again.

If you don't get any reports, no action is required from you. Your changes are working as expected, well done!