sbenza added inline comments. ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/MoveForwardingReferenceCheck.cpp:93 @@ +92,3 @@ + hasArgument(0, ignoringParenImpCasts(declRefExpr( + to(ForwardingReferenceParmMatcher))))) + .bind("call-move"), ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > I wonder if there's a reason for this behavior, or if it's simple a matter of > not being needed previously and so it was never implemented. @sbenza or > @klimek may know. I think we should be fixing the RecursiveASTVisitor, unless > there is a valid reason not to (which there may be), though that would be a > separate patch (and can happen after we land this one). Even if the nodes are not visited through the recursive visitor, you can always have a matcher for it. Eg: `hasAnyConstructorInitializer` / `cxxCtorInitializer`.
But what node are you trying to visit here? The only node I see is `NamingClass`, which is not really a child node. Like the referred `Decl` in a `DeclRefExpr` is not a child either. You can't use `has()` there, you have to use `to()`. https://reviews.llvm.org/D22220 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits