PiotrZSL added a comment.
First, re-base code, looks like there were some changes in this check, and now
there are conflicts with this path.
Second I don't any more comments, for me this code looks fine, BUT I'm not
familiar too much with this check.
Check history for this check, and maybe consider adding to review some other
people who modify it recently.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/utils/ExprSequence.cpp:68-73
+ for (const Expr *Arg : Call->arguments()) {
+ if (isDescendantOrEqual(Descendant, Arg, Context))
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
----------------
NOTE: This looks like llvm::any_of
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/utils/ExprSequence.cpp:77-82
+ for (const Expr *Arg : Call->arguments()) {
+ if (Arg == TheStmt)
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
----------------
NOTE: this looks like llvm::any_of, or even something like contains/find
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/utils/ExprSequence.cpp:161-165
+ if (const auto *call = dyn_cast<CallExpr>(Parent);
+ call && call->getCallee() == Before) {
+ if (isDescendantOfArgs(After, call, Context))
+ return true;
+ }
----------------
NOTE: probably you could move call outside if, and do rest with single if...
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:167
+ <clang-tidy/checks/bugprone/use-after-move>`:
+ - Fixed handling for designated initializers.
+ - Fix: In C++17 and later, the callee of a function is guaranteed to be
----------------
NOTE: Probably better would be to keep similar template to rest of checks, just
list fixes in sentences (or separated with ,), not as an list.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145581/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145581
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
