On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits < cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> jbcoe wrote: > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > I believe we use "modernize" to really mean "migrate from the old way > to the new way", which this definitely fits into since I think the point to > this check is to replace bind with better alternatives. > > Would you prefer it to be in `modernize`? I can be easily convinced > either way and am happy to move it. If I do move it I might add a script to > facilitate doing so. > My preference is for modernize, your preference is for readability, so I > say: make @alexfh the tie-breaker! ;-) Alex, what are your thoughts? This > seems like a heuristic we may want to state in our documentation to help > others decide where to put new checks in the future as well. > FWIW, I'd prefer "modernize", and I'll point out that these waters are muddied by the fact that three of the old ways (boost::bind, std::bind1st, std::bind2nd) all existed prior to C++11, so the fact that *one* of the old ways (std::bind) was introduced in C++11 doesn't matter so much. (I haven't looked, but I'd assume that this clang-tidy check catches all four cases, right?) –Arthur
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
