Prazek marked 5 inline comments as done. ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/UseEmplaceCheck.cpp:115 @@ -95,1 +114,3 @@ + auto CtorCallSourceRange = CharSourceRange::getTokenRange( + InnerCtorCall->getExprLoc(), CallParensRange.getBegin()); ---------------- alexfh wrote: > Prazek wrote: > > alexfh wrote: > > > Prazek wrote: > > > > alexfh wrote: > > > > > This doesn't seem to be an issue, since expression > > > > > `v.push_back(obj.member())` won't trigger this check: it expects that > > > > > the argument of the `push_back` call is a `cxxConstructExpr` or a > > > > > `cxxFunctionalCastExpr`. > > > > what about the implicit conversion? What if obj.member would return > > > > object that is different from the one that v stores, but it is > > > > convertible to it? > > > Sounds almost like a recipe for a test case ;) Have you tried to > > > construct it this way? > > Yes, I think I emulated this case in line 190. I tried to hit this problem > > but could not find the test case. > >> if The Call->getArg(0) will be a memberExpr (call to member function) > > what about the implicit conversion? > > I think, I know what happens in this case. When an implicit conversion > happens in `v.push_back(obj.member())`, then `Call->getArg(0)` is an implicit > `CXXConstructExpr`, not a `MemberExpr` (`MemberExpr` will be its indirect > child). The case should be handled correctly. That might be it. I remember that in some early version I was biding to MemberExpr somewhere, which might cause it.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D22208 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
