[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] `doesNotMutateObject`: Handle calls to member functions … (PR #94362)
firewave wrote: Thanks for looking into this. > So unfortunately this change won't improve > `performance-unnecessary-value-param`. > > I can have a look at unifying both in a subsequent PR. Simply adding comments to the tickets in question, so the information is not lost to time, would suffice for now. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94362 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] `doesNotMutateObject`: Handle calls to member functions … (PR #94362)
firewave wrote: Could this also be applied for #69577? (please also mind the tickets referenced in it) https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94362 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] new check readability-mark-static (PR #90830)
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-mark-static + +readability-mark-static +=== + +Detects variable and function can be marked as static. + +Static functions and variables are scoped to a single file. Marking functions +and variables as static helps to better remove dead code. In addition, it gives +the compiler more information and can help compiler make more aggressive +optimizations. + firewave wrote: Did some research but did not find the case I remembered (it might have variable templates though): - anonymous namespaces do not have external linkage until C++11: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/namespace#Unnamed_namespaces / https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/storage_duration#Linkage - `static` variable templates do not have internal linkage until C++14: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/storage_duration#Linkage Interesting tidbit that enumerations have external linkage. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90830 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] new check readability-mark-static (PR #90830)
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-mark-static + +readability-mark-static +=== + +Detects variable and function can be marked as static. + +Static functions and variables are scoped to a single file. Marking functions +and variables as static helps to better remove dead code. In addition, it gives +the compiler more information and can help compiler make more aggressive +optimizations. + firewave wrote: AFAIK `static` doesn't prevent ODR violations (unfortunately I do not have specifics - it is just from experience). You need to use anonymous namespaces for that. Also Clang has a bug where you might still encounter issues although the symbols should be internal (resulting in a crash) #75275. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90830 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] new check readability-mark-static (PR #90830)
firewave wrote: Isn't this already covered by `-Wmissing-prototypes`? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90830 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang] cppcheck: pass NodeKinds by const reference (PR #87273)
firewave wrote: Depending on the calling code the fix might actually be the introduction of `std::move()`. This is a known issue upstream: https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/12384. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/87273 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy]avoid bugprone-unused-return-value false positive for assignment operator overloading (PR #84489)
firewave wrote: Maybe add `+=` to the tests as well? I have also seen it reported with that. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84489 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [run-clang-tidy.py] Add option to ignore source files from compilation database (PR #82416)
firewave wrote: > Why can't we make "filter" use a full regex that supports negative > expressions instead? How do you do that? I thought `llvm::RegEx` doesn't support negative expressions. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82416 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy]avoid bugprone-unused-return-value false positive for function with the same prefix as the default argument (PR #84333)
firewave wrote: I think this might also require documentation changes. The documentation is also a bit misleading in terms of the defaults: https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone/unused-return-value.html. I add issues detecting a custom function as it required the ``::` prefix. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/84333 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] Add new modernize-string-find-startswith check (PR #72385)
firewave wrote: > Any thoughts on open-ended check name instead? `modernize-string-find-affix` > (affix = prefix | suffix)? `modernize-string-startswith-endswith` is the first what popped into my head but it would not have been my first choice. Would this also be the check you would implement the suggested use of `contains()` in? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72385 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] Add new modernize-string-find-startswith check (PR #72385)
firewave wrote: > would be to support also endswith in same check +1 On a side note: I will be looking into the related patterns and their performance soon as I am getting very strange code/performance when they are used outside of a benchmark - especially with Clang. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72385 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] Add new modernize-string-find-startswith check (PR #72385)
firewave wrote:
I wonder if this should also detect the `str.compare("marker", 0, 6) == 0`
pattern. There is possibly some kind of pattern involving `std::equal()` as
well. Could as well be a different check though.
Not sure if it would have a performance impact to use `starts_with()` instead
though.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72385
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] Improved readability-bool-conversion to be more consistent when using parentheses (PR #72068)
firewave wrote: > Hi @firewave, I think you are referencing a different issue. If I test #71852 > with PR #72050 I do not get the expected behavior. Of course you are right. I missed there being two different issues. Sorry about the noise. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72068 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
[clang-tools-extra] [clang-tidy] Improved readability-bool-conversion to be more consistent when using parentheses (PR #72068)
firewave wrote: Another PR for this was opened a few hours ago: #71848. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72068 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
