JonasToth added a comment. In D70390#1751159 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D70390#1751159>, @courbet wrote:
> > IMHO these two should just not overlap. It makes sense, to have > > controversial or configurable stuff in clang-tidy. It should just be > > consistent with the warnings, as those are "always right" and clang-tidy > > can be opinionated/specialized. > > So to make sure I understand you're advocating for keeping the `const` > version in the clang-tidy check but removing the `&&` detection from this > check and let the warning deal with that ? Yes. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D70390/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D70390 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
