https://github.com/knatten created https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96617
First of all, fix a confusion in the documentation for pro-type-member-init which used the wrong term for a user-provided constructor. (In the corresponding comment in ProTypeMemberInitCheck.h, which was added in the same commit that added this documentation, we already use the correct term). Second, also fix a comment in the corresponding test that had the same mistake. https://timsong-cpp.github.io/cppwp/std23/dcl.fct.def.default#5: > A function is user-provided if it is user-declared and not explicitly > defaulted or deleted on its first declaration. ("user-defined constructor" is not a thing in the standard) >From 7bc0205abaeeeab058d6568b202a0d7f98496863 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Anders Schau Knatten <and...@ascenium.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:13:35 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] [clang-tidy]: Use correct term for user-provided constructor First of all, fix a confusion in the documentation for pro-type-member-init which used the wrong term for a user-provided constructor. (In the corresponding comment in ProTypeMemberInitCheck.h, which was added in the same commit that added this documentation, we already use the correct term). Second, also fix a comment in the corresponding test that had the same mistake. https://timsong-cpp.github.io/cppwp/std23/dcl.fct.def.default#5: > A function is user-provided if it is user-declared and not explicitly > defaulted or deleted on its first declaration. ("user-defined constructor" is not a thing in the standard) --- .../checks/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.rst | 2 +- .../checkers/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.cpp | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.rst b/clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.rst index ae55bf7bd7c86..97af01a895e1c 100644 --- a/clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.rst +++ b/clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.rst @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-member-init ====================================== -The check flags user-defined constructor definitions that do not +The check flags user-provided constructor definitions that do not initialize all fields that would be left in an undefined state by default construction, e.g. builtins, pointers and record types without user-provided default constructors containing at least one such diff --git a/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.cpp b/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.cpp index eaa73b906ce09..d999b84cae03e 100644 --- a/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.cpp +++ b/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines/pro-type-member-init.cpp @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ struct PositiveUninitializedBaseOrdering : public NegativeAggregateType, }; // We shouldn't need to initialize anything because PositiveUninitializedBase -// has a user-defined constructor. +// has a user-provided constructor. struct NegativeUninitializedBase : public PositiveUninitializedBase { NegativeUninitializedBase() {} }; _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
