Clang static analysis results for dmd

[Walter Bright]

On 7/31/2011 3:28 AM, dennis luehring wrote:
> but i think clang was right with Walters code - i do not understand
> why he splits up the A and B conditional block into spereated ones when
> B does not work if A wasn't true before... makes it sense (in exactly
> this case) to write the code like he does?

What I meant was:

"A" represents an expression

"B" represents a different expression than "A", but is true if and only if "A" 
is true.

For example:

"A" might be: x=0;x=a->b->c?1:0;a->b->c

"B" might be: x