ccotter marked 2 inline comments as done. ccotter added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines/forwarding-reference-param-not-forwarded.cpp:138 + +} // namespace negative_cases ---------------- PiotrZSL wrote: > ccotter wrote: > > ccotter wrote: > > > PiotrZSL wrote: > > > > what about when someone uses std::move instead of std::format ? > > > > maybe some "note" for such issue ? > > > Are you suggesting to have the tool add a special note in something like > > > > > > ``` > > > template <class T> > > > void foo(T&& t) { T other = std::move(t); } > > > ``` > > > > > > I'm not sure I completely followed what you were saying. Or perhaps a > > > fixit for this specific case of using move on a forwarding reference > > > (fixit to replace `move` with `forward`). > > @PiotrZSL - I wasn't sure what you meant here. > Yes, I meant that situation. But only because "forwarding reference parameter > 't' is never forwarded inside the function body" could be confused in such > case, where there is std::move instead of std::forward. > But that could be ignored, or covered by other check that would simply detect > that you doing move when you should do forward. Ya, https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone/move-forwarding-reference.html should cover this. This new check missing-std-forward only knows how to find code that is missing `forward` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146921/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146921 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits