v1nh1shungry added a comment. > About my template example: I wanted to say that the actual > bugprone-implicit-widening-of-multiplication-result rule looks to not analyze > template calculation problem. So I think it's better to use the desugared > type (size_t).
Hmm, I don't think this two are related. > It's not acceptable (IMHO) that the hard-coded size_t is resolved as long. > According to https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/types long may be 32 > bits. Yeah, I don't have a good feeling about it too. The point is that we love desugaring `size_type` to `size_t` (which I haven't found a way to achieve yet), and hate desugaring `int64_t` to `long`, but how can we classify them? They BOTH are the desugared type. According to the conversation above, I'd use the qualified alias type name. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D141058/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D141058 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
