Re: [PATCH] D21303: [clang-tidy] Adds performance-returning-type check.
mnbvmar added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/performance/ReturningTypeCheck.cpp:69
@@ +68,3 @@
+AST_MATCHER_FUNCTION(ast_matchers::internal::Matcher,
+ haveOneActiveArgument) {
+ return anyOf(parameterCountIs(1),
Probably hasOneActiveArgument.
Comment at: clang-tidy/performance/ReturningTypeCheck.cpp:72
@@ +71,3 @@
+ allOf(unless(parameterCountIs(0)),
+ hasParameter(2, hasDefaultArgument(;
+}
In hasParameter(N, ...), argument id is 0-based. Did you mean to match the
third parameter (1-based)?
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21303
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20053: [clang-tidy] Add misc-unnecessary-mutable check.
mnbvmar marked 14 inline comments as done. mnbvmar added a comment. http://reviews.llvm.org/D20053 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20053: [clang-tidy] Add misc-unnecessary-mutable check.
mnbvmar added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/UnnecessaryMutableCheck.cpp:47
@@ +46,3 @@
+
+ void RunSearch(const Decl *Declaration) {
+auto *Body = Declaration->getBody();
Unless I miss something, the moment we set FoundNonConstUse to true, we stop
recurring both in FieldUseVisitor and ClassMethodVisitor.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20053
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D20053: [clang-tidy] Add misc-unnecessary-mutable check.
mnbvmar updated this revision to Diff 59445.
mnbvmar added a comment.
Fixes done.
Added macro test.
Docs should be working now.
Updated docs.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20053
Files:
clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/misc/MiscTidyModule.cpp
clang-tidy/misc/UnnecessaryMutableCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/misc/UnnecessaryMutableCheck.h
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/misc-unnecessary-mutable.rst
test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,377 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-unnecessary-mutable %t
+
+struct NothingMutable {
+ int field1;
+ unsigned field2;
+ const int field3;
+ volatile float field4;
+
+ NothingMutable(int a1, unsigned a2, int a3, float a4) : field1(a1), field2(a2), field3(a3), field4(a4) {}
+
+ void doSomething() {
+field1 = 1;
+field2 = 2;
+field4 = 4;
+ }
+};
+
+struct NoMethods {
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2; // These cannot be fixed; they're public
+ const int field3;
+ mutable volatile NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+class NoMethodsClass {
+public:
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2;
+
+private:
+ const int field3;
+ mutable volatile NothingMutable field4;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:35: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field4' [misc-unnecessary-mutable]
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}volatile NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+struct PrivateInStruct {
+private:
+ mutable volatile unsigned long long blah;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:39: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'blah' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}volatile unsigned long long blah;
+};
+
+union PrivateInUnion {
+public:
+ int someField;
+
+private:
+ mutable char otherField;
+};
+
+class UnusedVar {
+private:
+ mutable int x __attribute__((unused));
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'x' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int x __attribute__((unused));
+};
+
+class NoConstMethodsClass {
+public:
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2;
+
+ NoConstMethodsClass() : field2(42), field3(9), field4(NothingMutable(1, 2, 3, 4)) {}
+
+ void doSomething() {
+field2 = 8;
+field1 = 99;
+field4.doSomething();
+ }
+
+private:
+ const int field3;
+ mutable NothingMutable field4;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:26: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field4' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+class ConstMethods {
+private:
+ mutable int field1, field2;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:23: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field2' {{..}}
+ mutable int incr, decr, set, mul, constArg1, constArg2, constRef, ref1, ref2;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:37: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constArg1' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-2]]:48: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constArg2' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-3]]:59: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constRef' {{..}}
+
+ void takeArg(int x) const { x *= 4; }
+ int takeConstRef(const int ) const { return x + 99; }
+ void takeRef(int &) const {}
+
+ template
+ void takeArgs(Args... args) const {}
+ template
+ void takeArgRefs(Args &... args) const {}
+
+public:
+ void doSomething() const {
+field1 = field2;
+ }
+
+ void doOtherThing() const {
+incr++;
+decr--;
+set = 42;
+mul *= 3;
+takeArg(constArg1);
+takeConstRef(constRef);
+takeRef(ref1);
+takeArgs(constArg1, constArg2);
+takeArgRefs(ref1, ref2);
+ }
+};
+
+class NonFinalClass {
+public:
+ mutable int fPublic;
+
+protected:
+ mutable int fProtected;
+
+private:
+ mutable int fPrivate;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fPrivate' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fPrivate;
+};
+
+class FinalClass final {
+public:
+ mutable int fPublic;
+
+protected:
+ mutable int fProtected;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fProtected' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fProtected;
+
+private:
+ mutable int fPrivate;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fPrivate' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fPrivate;
+};
+
+class NotAllFuncsKnown {
+ void doSomething();
+ void doSomethingConst() const {}
+
+private:
+ mutable int field;
+ // Can't be fixed. We don't know if doSomething() doesn't declare a *const* NotAllFuncsKnown instance
+ // and then modify 'field' field.
+};
+
+class NotAllConstFuncsKnown {
+ void doSomething() {}
+ void doSomethingConst() const;
+ void doOtherConst() const {}
+
+private:
+ mutable int field;
+};
+
+class ConstFuncOutside
Re: [PATCH] D19165: [clang-tidy] Add modernize-increment-bool check.
mnbvmar updated this revision to Diff 58940.
mnbvmar added a comment.
Clang-formatted code.
Added a simple macro test.
Resolved @Prazek's issues.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19165
Files:
clang-tidy/modernize/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/modernize/IncrementBoolCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/modernize/IncrementBoolCheck.h
clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s modernize-increment-bool %t
+
+#define INCR(var) ((var)++)
+
+template
+T (T ) { return x; }
+
+template
+void g() {
+ T x;
+ x++;
+
+ bool y;
+ y++;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: y = true;
+}
+
+int main() {
+ bool b1 = false, b2 = false, b3 = false;
+
+ b1++;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: b1 = true;
+
+ bool b4 = f(b1)++;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:13: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+
+ bool b5 = ++f(b1);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:13: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: bool b5 = (f(b1) = true);
+
+ (b1 = false)++;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = false) = true;
+
+ (b1 = b2 = false)++;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = b2 = false) = true;
+
+ ++(b1 = b2 = false);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = b2 = false) = true;
+
+ b3 = b1++ && b2;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:8: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+
+ b3 = ++(b1 |= b4) && b3;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:8: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+ // CHECK-FIXES: b3 = ((b1 |= b4) = true) && b3;
+
+ int x = 8;
+ x++;
+
+ INCR(b1);
+
+ g();
+ g();
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
===
--- /dev/null
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - modernize-increment-bool
+
+modernize-increment-bool
+
+
+This check detects the deprecated boolean type incrementation, and wherever possible,
+converts it into truth assignment.
+
+C++17 forbids this behavior. Before C++17 this was equivalent to setting the variable
+to true.
+
+
+Example
+---
+
+Original:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool variable = false;
+ variable++;
+ ++variable;
+
+ bool another = ++variable;
+ bool third = ++variable && another;
+
+After applying the check:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool variable = false;
+ variable = true;
+ variable = true; /* Both postfix and prefix incrementations are supported. */
+
+ bool another = (variable = true);
+ bool third = (variable = true) && another;
+
+
+Limitations
+---
+
+When postfix boolean incrementation is not the outermost operation done in the instruction,
+tool will not repair the problem (the fix would have to append some instructions after the
+statement). For example:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool first = false, second;
+ second = first++;
+
+ // Equivalent to:
+ second = false;
+ first = true;
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@
misc-unused-using-decls
misc-virtual-near-miss
modernize-deprecated-headers
+ modernize-increment-bool
modernize-loop-convert
modernize-make-shared
modernize-make-unique
Index: clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include "../ClangTidyModule.h"
#include "../ClangTidyModuleRegistry.h"
#include "DeprecatedHeadersCheck.h"
+#include "IncrementBoolCheck.h"
#include "LoopConvertCheck.h"
#include "MakeSharedCheck.h"
#include "MakeUniqueCheck.h"
@@ -35,6 +36,8 @@
void addCheckFactories(ClangTidyCheckFactories ) override {
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"modernize-deprecated-headers");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"modernize-increment-bool");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("modernize-loop-convert");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("modernize-make-shared");
[PATCH] D20053: [clang-tidy] Add misc-unnecessary-mutable check.
mnbvmar created this revision.
mnbvmar added a reviewer: alexfh.
mnbvmar added subscribers: krystyna, sbarzowski, Prazek, staronj, cfe-commits.
This implements unnecessary-mutable check. It's still bug-prone and might
produce false positives, so all suggestions are welcome.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20053
Files:
clang-tidy/misc/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/misc/MiscTidyModule.cpp
clang-tidy/misc/UnnecessaryMutableCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/misc/UnnecessaryMutableCheck.h
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/misc-unnecessary-mutable.rst
test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/clang-tidy/misc-unnecessary-mutable.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,354 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-unnecessary-mutable %t
+
+struct NothingMutable {
+ int field1;
+ unsigned field2;
+ const int field3;
+ volatile float field4;
+
+ NothingMutable(int a1, unsigned a2, int a3, float a4) : field1(a1), field2(a2), field3(a3), field4(a4) {}
+
+ void doSomething() {
+field1 = 1;
+field2 = 2;
+field4 = 4;
+ }
+};
+
+struct NoMethods {
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2; // These cannot be fixed; they're public
+ const int field3;
+ mutable volatile NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+class NoMethodsClass {
+public:
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2;
+
+private:
+ const int field3;
+ mutable volatile NothingMutable field4;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:35: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field4' [misc-unnecessary-mutable]
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}volatile NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+struct PrivateInStruct {
+private:
+ mutable volatile unsigned long long blah;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:39: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'blah' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}volatile unsigned long long blah;
+};
+
+union PrivateInUnion {
+public:
+ int someField;
+
+private:
+ mutable char otherField;
+};
+
+class UnusedVar {
+private:
+ mutable int x __attribute__((unused));
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'x' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int x __attribute__((unused));
+};
+
+class NoConstMethodsClass {
+public:
+ int field1;
+ mutable unsigned field2;
+
+ NoConstMethodsClass() : field2(42), field3(9), field4(NothingMutable(1, 2, 3, 4)) {}
+
+ void doSomething() {
+field2 = 8;
+field1 = 99;
+field4.doSomething();
+ }
+
+private:
+ const int field3;
+ mutable NothingMutable field4;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:26: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field4' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}NothingMutable field4;
+};
+
+class ConstMethods {
+private:
+ mutable int field1, field2;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:23: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'field2' {{..}}
+ mutable int incr, decr, set, mul, constArg1, constArg2, constRef, ref1, ref2;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:37: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constArg1' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-2]]:48: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constArg2' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-3]]:59: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'constRef' {{..}}
+
+ void takeArg(int x) const { x *= 4; }
+ int takeConstRef(const int ) const { return x + 99; }
+ void takeRef(int &) const {}
+
+ template
+ void takeArgs(Args... args) const {}
+ template
+ void takeArgRefs(Args &... args) const {}
+
+public:
+ void doSomething() const {
+field1 = field2;
+ }
+
+ void doOtherThing() const {
+incr++;
+decr--;
+set = 42;
+mul *= 3;
+takeArg(constArg1);
+takeConstRef(constRef);
+takeRef(ref1);
+takeArgs(constArg1, constArg2);
+takeArgRefs(ref1, ref2);
+ }
+};
+
+class NonFinalClass {
+public:
+ mutable int fPublic;
+
+protected:
+ mutable int fProtected;
+
+private:
+ mutable int fPrivate;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fPrivate' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fPrivate;
+};
+
+class FinalClass final {
+public:
+ mutable int fPublic;
+
+protected:
+ mutable int fProtected;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fProtected' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fProtected;
+
+private:
+ mutable int fPrivate;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:15: warning: 'mutable' modifier is unnecessary for field 'fPrivate' {{..}}
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^ }}int fPrivate;
+};
+
+class NotAllFuncsKnown {
+ void doSomething();
+ void doSomethingConst() const {}
+
+private:
+ mutable int field;
+ // Can't be fixed. We don't know if doSomething() doesn't declare a *const* NotAllFuncsKnown instance
+ // and then modify 'field' field.
+};
+
+class NotAllConstFuncsKnown {
+ void doSomething() {}
+ void
[PATCH] D19165: [clang-tidy] Add modernize-increment-bool check.
mnbvmar created this revision.
mnbvmar added reviewers: alexfh, Prazek, staronj, krystyna.
mnbvmar added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19165
Files:
clang-tidy/modernize/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/modernize/IncrementBoolCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/modernize/IncrementBoolCheck.h
clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
===
--- /dev/null
+++ test/clang-tidy/modernize-increment-bool.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s modernize-increment-bool %t
+
+template
+T& f(T ) { return x; }
+
+template
+void g() {
+ T x;
+ x++;
+
+ bool y;
+ y++;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: y = true;
+}
+
+int main() {
+ bool b1 = false, b2 = false, b3 = false;
+
+ b1++;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: b1 = true;
+
+ bool b4 = f(b1)++;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:13: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+
+ bool b5 = ++f(b1);
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:13: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: bool b5 = (f(b1) = true);
+
+ (b1 = false)++;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = false) = true;
+
+ (b1 = b2 = false)++;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = b2 = false) = true;
+
+ ++(b1 = b2 = false);
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: (b1 = b2 = false) = true;
+
+ b3 = b1++ && b2;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:8: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+
+ b3 = ++(b1 |= b4) && b3;
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:8: warning: bool incrementation is deprecated, use assignment
+// CHECK-FIXES: b3 = ((b1 |= b4) = true) && b3;
+
+ int x = 8;
+ x++;
+
+ g();
+ g();
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
===
--- /dev/null
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-increment-bool.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - modernize-increment-bool
+
+modernize-increment-bool
+
+
+This check detects the deprecated boolean type incrementation, and wherever possible,
+converts it into truth assignment.
+
+C++17 forbids this behavior. Before C++17 this was equivalent to setting the variable
+to true.
+
+
+Example
+---
+
+Original:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool variable = false;
+ variable++;
+ ++variable;
+
+ bool another = ++variable;
+ bool third = ++variable && another;
+
+After applying the check:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool variable = false;
+ variable = true;
+ variable = true; /* Both postfix and prefix incrementations are supported. */
+
+ bool another = (variable = true);
+ bool third = (variable = true) && another;
+
+
+Limitations
+---
+
+When postfix boolean incrementation is not the outermost operation done in the instruction,
+tool will not repair the problem (the fix would have to append some instructions after the
+statement). For example:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ bool first = false, second;
+
+ /* Equivalent to:
+if (!first) {
+ second = false;
+ first = true;
+}
+ */
+ if (!first) second = first++;
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@
misc-unused-raii
misc-virtual-near-miss
modernize-deprecated-headers
+ modernize-increment-bool
modernize-loop-convert
modernize-make-unique
modernize-pass-by-value
Index: clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include "../ClangTidyModule.h"
#include "../ClangTidyModuleRegistry.h"
#include "DeprecatedHeadersCheck.h"
+#include "IncrementBoolCheck.h"
#include "LoopConvertCheck.h"
#include "MakeUniqueCheck.h"
#include "PassByValueCheck.h"
@@ -34,6 +35,8 @@
void addCheckFactories(ClangTidyCheckFactories ) override {
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"modernize-deprecated-headers");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"modernize-increment-bool");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("modernize-loop-convert");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("modernize-make-unique");
CheckFactories.registerCheck("modernize-pass-by-value");
Index:
Re: [PATCH] D18821: Add modernize-bool-to-integer-conversion
mnbvmar added a comment. This check throws a warning also on the conversion to floats (probably very rare ones): double number = true; Even though this behavior is correct, the code warns about the implicit conversion to **integers**. Comment at: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:119 @@ +118,3 @@ + + Replaces implicit cast from bool literals to integers to int literals. + **with** int literals http://reviews.llvm.org/D18821 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D18745: [clang-tidy] Adds modernize-use-bool-literals check.
mnbvmar added a comment. You could also think whether char literals should be converted to true/false, too. Apart from this (and other people's doubts), everything's fine. http://reviews.llvm.org/D18745 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
