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
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
