aaron.ballman added a comment.
I am generally in favor of this but would be curious to see how the check
reacts to real world code bases. Facebook's usage experience is compelling, but
I'm also wondering how bad the false-positive rate is on existing code. Can you
try running the check over LLVM itself (perhaps after adding the option to add
custom data types to the list and adding DenseMap and friends) and report back
on what you find?
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/bugprone/MapSubscriptOperatorLookupCheck.cpp:21
+void MapSubscriptOperatorLookupCheck::registerMatchers(MatchFinder *Finder) {
+ Finder->addMatcher(
+ cxxOperatorCallExpr(
----------------
No need to register the matchers unless in C++ mode.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/bugprone/MapSubscriptOperatorLookupCheck.h:19
+
+/// FIXME: Write a short description.
+///
----------------
Should fix up the description.
================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst:96
fuchsia-default-arguments
+ fuchsia-header-anon-namespaces (redirects to google-build-namespaces)
<fuchsia-header-anon-namespaces>
fuchsia-multiple-inheritance
----------------
This change looks unrelated (but reasonable -- you can commit this change
without review).
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D46317
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
