Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:43
@@ +42,3 @@
+
+static StringRef getAsString(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result,
+ const Expr *E) {
alexfh wrote:
> Looks like this repeats getText from clang/Tooling/FixIt.h.
Yes indeed..
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki set the repository for this revision to rL LLVM.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67144.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
Fixed review comments.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
This check warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating
strings using the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
Improvements to include-fixer
-
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h - clang-tidy-*- C++ -*-===//
+//
+//
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki removed rL LLVM as the repository for this revision.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67145.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
Cleanup my previous commit. Ran clang-format.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
This check warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating
strings using the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
Improvements to include-fixer
-
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h - clang-tidy-*- C++ -*-===//
+//
+
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh added a comment.
Thanks, that's better. Still a couple of comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:50
@@ +49,3 @@
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
+ "unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []");
+
I'd say "confusing" instead of "unusual". This would also help avoiding the
repetition ("unusual ..., usually ..."):
"confusing array index syntax; usually, the index is inside the brackets"
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:54
@@ +53,3 @@
+ // a fixit for.
+ if (hasMacroID(ArraySubscriptE) ||
+
!Result.SourceManager->isWrittenInSameFile(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
What exactly is the recursive `hasMacroID` function trying to prevent? Do you
have a test that breaks if you just check that the start location of the
expression is not a macro?
In most cases, it's enough to check that the whole range is on the same macro
expansion level using `Lexer::makeFileCharRange` in order to prevent most
problems with macros, while allowing fixes in safe cases, e.g. replacements in
parameters of `EXPECT_*` macros from gtest.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
aaron.ballman added a subscriber: aaron.ballman.
aaron.ballman added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
Is there a reason we don't want this check to be a part of the clang frontend,
rather than as a clang-tidy check?
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:27-28
@@ +26,4 @@
+ hasRHS(ignoringParenImpCasts(
+ anyOf(stringLiteral(),
declRefExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType(,
+memberExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType(
+ .bind("expr"),
Can this use `hasType(pointerType())` instead of
`hasType(pointsTo(qualType()))` ?
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48
@@ +47,3 @@
+
+ auto D =
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
Should not use `auto` here because the type is not spelled out in the
initialization.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:50
@@ +49,3 @@
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
+ "unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []");
+
alexfh wrote:
> I'd say "confusing" instead of "unusual". This would also help avoiding the
> repetition ("unusual ..., usually ..."):
>
> "confusing array index syntax; usually, the index is inside the brackets"
Instead of "array index syntax", perhaps "array subscript expression"?
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:52
@@ +51,3 @@
+
+ // Don't even try to resolve macro or include contraptions. Not worth
emitting
+ // a fixit for.
What does "contraptions" mean in this context?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
jroelofs added a subscriber: jroelofs. jroelofs added a comment. I think the replacement is wrong for something like: int *arr; int offs1, offs2; offs1[arr + offs2] = 42; which I think would give: int *arr; int offs1, offs2; arr + offs2[offs1] = 42; If the precedence of the "indexing" argument is less than that of the subscript operator, then you need to insert parens: int *arr; int offs1, offs2; (arr + offs2)[offs1] = 42; https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote: > I think the replacement is wrong for something like: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > offs1[arr + offs2] = 42; > > > which I think would give: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > arr + offs2[offs1] = 42; > > > If the precedence of the "indexing" argument is less than that of the > subscript operator, then you need to insert parens: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > (arr + offs2)[offs1] = 42; > Indeed. It might be relevant to future (current ones seem to be fine) uses of `tooling::fixit::createReplacement` as well, so should probably be taken care of in its implementation. Maybe an additional hint from the calling code is needed (`bool InsertParensIfNeeded = false`). https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48 @@ +47,3 @@ + + auto D = + diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(), aaron.ballman wrote: > Should not use `auto` here because the type is not spelled out in the > initialization. While in general I agree with this recommendation, `auto Diag = diag(...);` has almost become an idiom in this code. I'd not worry about obscurity of `auto` in this context, especially, if the variable is renamed to `Diag`, which will make its meaning and possible ways of using it clearer. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
aaron.ballman added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48 @@ +47,3 @@ + + auto D = + diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(), alexfh wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > Should not use `auto` here because the type is not spelled out in the > > initialization. > While in general I agree with this recommendation, `auto Diag = diag(...);` > has almost become an idiom in this code. I'd not worry about obscurity of > `auto` in this context, especially, if the variable is renamed to `Diag`, > which will make its meaning and possible ways of using it clearer. I'm okay with that approach. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked an inline comment as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508511, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> Is there a reason we don't want this check to be a part of the clang
> frontend, rather than as a clang-tidy check?
I discussed this with frontend and clang-tidy people in the llvm meeting last
year and we came to the conclusion it was better in clang-tidy.
I don't remember the exact reasons.
But I think that this code is just "weird". It could be a bug but I write the
warning mostly for readability reasons.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:43
@@ +42,3 @@
+
+static StringRef getAsString(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result,
+ const Expr *E) {
danielmarjamaki wrote:
> alexfh wrote:
> > Looks like this repeats getText from clang/Tooling/FixIt.h.
> Yes indeed..
this is fixed. As you suggested I used createReplacement() in the fixit. It's
much nicer!
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote: > I think the replacement is wrong for something like: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > offs1[arr + offs2] = 42; > > > which I think would give: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > arr + offs2[offs1] = 42; > > > If the precedence of the "indexing" argument is less than that of the > subscript operator, then you need to insert parens: > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > (arr + offs2)[offs1] = 42; > I don't think so. The matcher says: hasRHS(ignoringParenImpCasts( anyOf(stringLiteral(), declRefExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType(, memberExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType())) I think it's hard to know what the replaced code should be. In some cases it might be better with: arr[offs1 + offs2] = 42; https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67322.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
take care of review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
This check warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating
strings using the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
Improvements to include-fixer
-
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h - clang-tidy-*- C++ -*-===//
+//
+// The LLVM Compiler Infra
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked 4 inline comments as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
as far as I see the only unsolved review comment now is about macros. if it can
be handled better.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:28-29
@@ +27,4 @@
+ anyOf(stringLiteral(), declRefExpr(hasType(pointerType())),
+memberExpr(hasType(pointerType()))
+ .bind("expr"),
+ this);
Yes thanks!
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:53
@@ +52,3 @@
+ if (hasMacroID(ArraySubscriptE) ||
+
!Result.SourceManager->isWrittenInSameFile(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
+ ArraySubscriptE->getLocEnd()))
you can do lots of weird things with macros. so I wanted to just diagnose and
then have no fixits that would be wrong etc. I removed the comment since I
think the code is pretty clear.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:55
@@ +54,3 @@
+ ArraySubscriptE->getLocEnd()))
+return;
+
> What exactly is the recursive hasMacroID function trying to prevent? Do you
> have a test that breaks if you just check that the start location of the
> expression is not a macro?
I am worried about macros anywhere. I did not want to apply fixes for this
code: 0[ABC] but maybe using the Lexer would make that safe.
> In most cases, it's enough to check that the whole range is on the same macro
> expansion level using Lexer::makeFileCharRange in order to prevent most
> problems with macros, while allowing fixes in safe cases, e.g. replacements
> in parameters of EXPECT_* macros from gtest.
I was very unsuccessful with that. I must do something wrong...
```
CharSourceRange LRange = Lexer::makeFileCharRange(
CharSourceRange::getCharRange(
ArraySubscriptE->getLHS()->getSourceRange()),
Result.Context->getSourceManager(), Result.Context->getLangOpts());
CharSourceRange RRange = Lexer::makeFileCharRange(
CharSourceRange::getCharRange(
ArraySubscriptE->getLHS()->getSourceRange()),
Result.Context->getSourceManager(), Result.Context->getLangOpts());
StringRef LText = Lexer::getSourceText(LRange, *Result.SourceManager,
Result.Context->getLangOpts());
StringRef RText = Lexer::getSourceText(RRange, *Result.SourceManager,
Result.Context->getLangOpts());
Diag <<
FixItHint::CreateReplacement(ArraySubscriptE->getLHS()->getSourceRange(),
RText);
Diag <<
FixItHint::CreateReplacement(ArraySubscriptE->getRHS()->getSourceRange(),
LText);
```
No fixits worked with that code, with or without macros.
Do you see what I did wrong?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
aaron.ballman added inline comments. Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:31 @@ +30,3 @@ + x[10] = 0; + dostuff(0[0 + ABC]); +} Why is this considered to be "normal syntax" and not worth getting a diagnostic? https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked 2 inline comments as done. Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:31 @@ +30,3 @@ + x[10] = 0; + dostuff(0[0 + ABC]); +} aaron.ballman wrote: > Why is this considered to be "normal syntax" and not worth getting a > diagnostic? hmm.. I agree that it would be good to have a diagnostic for this code also. I currently only diagnose when subscript is stringLiteral, declRefExpr or memberExpr. These are the cases when the code can be easily fixed by just replacing the expressions. I will look into writing a diagnostic for this also. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
jroelofs added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#509522, @danielmarjamaki wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote: > > > I think the replacement is wrong for something like: > > > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > > offs1[arr + offs2] = 42; > > > > > > which I think would give: > > > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > > arr + offs2[offs1] = 42; > > > > > > If the precedence of the "indexing" argument is less than that of the > > subscript operator, then you need to insert parens: > > > > int *arr; int offs1, offs2; > > (arr + offs2)[offs1] = 42; > > > > > I don't think so. The matcher says: > > hasRHS(ignoringParenImpCasts( > anyOf(stringLiteral(), declRefExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType(, > memberExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType())) > > > I think it's hard to know what the replaced code should be. In some cases it > might be better with: > > arr[offs1 + offs2] = 42; > Oh, yeah, you're right. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67337.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
More generic diagnostic. Diagnose all integerType[pointerType] expressions.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit. Probably the code should be ABC[0]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
This check warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating
strings using the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
Improvements to include-fixer
-
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedA
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67338.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
ran clang-format
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit. Probably the code should be ABC[0]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -75,6 +75,10 @@
This check warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating
strings using the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
Improvements to include-fixer
-
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayI
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked an inline comment as done. danielmarjamaki added a comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh requested changes to this revision.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:56
@@ +55,3 @@
+ if (hasMacroID(ArraySubscriptE) ||
+
!Result.SourceManager->isWrittenInSameFile(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
+ ArraySubscriptE->getLocEnd()))
Both ranges seem to be using `ArraySubscriptE->getLHS()->getSourceRange()`. I
guess, the second one should refer to
`ArraySubscriptE->getRHS()->getSourceRange()` instead?
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst:12
@@ +11,3 @@
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
Please format examples according to LLVM style (specifically, leave braces at
the end of the previous line.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:16
@@ +15,3 @@
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript
expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
Please truncate all CHECK-MESSAGES except for the first one after "confusing
array subscript expression".
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:25
@@ +24,3 @@
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript
expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+
Please add a CHECK-FIXES to verify the original code is left intact. Same for
other places where no fixits are expected.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 69113.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fixed review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(ABC[1]);
+
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // No fixit. Probably the code should be ABC[0]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y) {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y) {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -127,6 +127,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-non-const-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -85,6 +85,11 @@
Warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating strings using
the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
+
- New `readability-non-const-parameter
`_ check
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "NonConstParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
@@ -54,6 +55,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked 6 inline comments as done.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:57
@@ +56,2 @@
+} // namespace tidy
+} // namespace clang
I removed hasMacroId() and use fixit::getText(). The replacements look good now.
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst:13
@@ +12,3 @@
+ void f(int *x, int y) {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
ok thanks same mistake I've done before. Should I start using uppercase
variable names from now on?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh requested changes to this revision.
alexfh added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
A few nits.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h:19
@@ +18,3 @@
+
+/// Warn about unusual array index syntax (index[array] instead of
+/// array[index]).
Please enclose inline code snippets in backquotes.
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst:10
@@ +9,3 @@
+
+.. code:: c++
+
This should be `.. code-block:: c++`.
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst:13
@@ +12,3 @@
+ void f(int *x, int y) {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
danielmarjamaki wrote:
> ok thanks same mistake I've done before. Should I start using uppercase
> variable names from now on?
Interesting question. Probably, better to do so.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 69558.
danielmarjamaki marked 2 inline comments as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fix review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *X; int *Y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *P1, struct XY *P2) {
+ 10[P1] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: P1[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[P2->X] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: P2->X[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(ABC[1]);
+
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // No fixit. Probably the code should be ABC[0]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *X) {
+ X[10] = 0;
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ void f(int *X, int Y) {
+Y[X] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code-block:: c++
+
+ void f(int *X, int Y) {
+X[Y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -127,6 +127,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-non-const-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -85,6 +85,11 @@
Warns about the performance overhead arising from concatenating strings using
the ``operator+``, instead of ``operator+=``.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
+
- New `readability-non-const-parameter
`_ check
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "NonConstParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
@@ -54,6 +55,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayInd
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki marked 4 inline comments as done. danielmarjamaki added a comment. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh accepted this revision. alexfh added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Looks good. Please ensure it works reasonably on LLVM code before submitting. Sorry for the delay. Feel free to ping earlier. https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL281206: [clang-tidy] readability-misplaced-array-index: add
new check that warns when… (authored by danielmarjamaki).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134?vs=69558&id=70994#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
clang-tools-extra/trunk/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
clang-tools-extra/trunk/docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
clang-tools-extra/trunk/docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *X; int *Y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *P1, struct XY *P2) {
+ 10[P1] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: P1[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[P2->X] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: P2->X[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(ABC[1]);
+
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: confusing array subscript expression
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+ // No fixit. Probably the code should be ABC[0]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *X) {
+ X[10] = 0;
+}
Index: clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h - clang-tidy-*- C++ -*-===//
+//
+// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructure
+//
+// This file is distributed under the University of Illinois Open Source
+// License. See LICENSE.TXT for details.
+//
+//===--===//
+
+#ifndef LLVM_CLANG_TOOLS_EXTRA_CLANG_TIDY_READABILITY_MISPLACED_ARRAY_INDEX_H
+#define LLVM_CLANG_TOOLS_EXTRA_CLANG_TIDY_READABILITY_MISPLACED_ARRAY_INDEX_H
+
+#include "../ClangTidy.h"
+
+namespace clang {
+namespace tidy {
+namespace readability {
+
+/// Warn about unusual array index syntax (`index[array]` instead of
+/// `array[index]`).
+///
+/// For the user-facing documentation see:
+/// http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.html
+class MisplacedArrayIndexCheck : public ClangTidyCheck {
+public:
+ MisplacedArrayIndexCheck(StringRef Name, ClangTidyContext *Context)
+ : ClangTidyCheck(Name, Context) {}
+ void registerMatchers(ast_matchers::MatchFinder *Finder) override;
+ void check(const ast_matchers::MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result) override;
+};
+
+} // namespace readability
+} // namespace tidy
+} // namespace clang
+
+#endif // LLVM_CLANG_TOOLS_EXTRA_CLANG_TIDY_READABILITY_MISPLACED_ARRAY_INDEX_H
Index: clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "NonConstParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
@@ -54,6 +55,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tools-extra/trunk/clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
Eugene.Zelenko added a subscriber: Eugene.Zelenko. Eugene.Zelenko added a comment. Please mention this check in docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (in alphabetical order). Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki removed rL LLVM as the repository for this revision.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 60803.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
updated releasedocs
deeper lookup if macro is used
only warn when the replacement can be done safely. the expressions "x[y+z]" and
y+z[x]" are not the same.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -120,6 +120,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -249,6 +249,11 @@
Warns about defaulted constructors and assignment operators that are actually
deleted.
+- New `misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
+
- New `readability-redundant-control-flow
`_ check
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readabili
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 60804.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fixed typo in releasenotes
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
Index: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
===
--- test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
+++ test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-misplaced-array-index %t
+
+#define ABC "abc"
+
+struct XY { int *x; int *y; };
+
+void dostuff(int);
+
+void unusualSyntax(int *x, struct XY *xy)
+{
+ 10[x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: x[10] = 0;
+
+ 10[xy->x] = 0;
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: xy->x[10] = 0;
+
+ dostuff(1["abc"]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // CHECK-FIXES: dostuff("abc"[1]);
+
+ dostuff(1[ABC]);
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:11: warning: unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []
+ // No fixit, we don't want to replace with "abc"[1]
+}
+
+void normalSyntax(int *x)
+{
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-misplaced-array-index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+.. title:: clang-tidy - readability-misplaced-array-index
+
+readability-misplaced-array-index
+=
+
+This check warns for unusual array index syntax.
+
+The following code has unusual array index syntax:
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+y[x] = 0;
+ }
+
+becomes
+
+.. code:: c++
+
+ void f(int *x, int y)
+ {
+x[y] = 0;
+ }
+
+The check warns about such unusual syntax for readability reasons:
+ * There are programmers that are not familiar with this unusual syntax.
+ * It is possible that variables are mixed up.
+
Index: docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
===
--- docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
+++ docs/clang-tidy/checks/list.rst
@@ -120,6 +120,7 @@
readability-identifier-naming
readability-implicit-bool-cast
readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name
+ readability-misplaced-array-index
readability-named-parameter
readability-redundant-control-flow
readability-redundant-smartptr-get
Index: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
===
--- docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
+++ docs/ReleaseNotes.rst
@@ -249,6 +249,11 @@
Warns about defaulted constructors and assignment operators that are actually
deleted.
+- New `readability-misplaced-array-index
+ `_ check
+
+ Warns when there is array index before the [] instead of inside it.
+
- New `readability-redundant-control-flow
`_ check
Index: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
+++ clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include "IdentifierNamingCheck.h"
#include "ImplicitBoolCastCheck.h"
#include "InconsistentDeclarationParameterNameCheck.h"
+#include "MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h"
#include "NamedParameterCheck.h"
#include "RedundantControlFlowCheck.h"
#include "RedundantSmartptrGetCheck.h"
@@ -53,6 +54,8 @@
"readability-implicit-bool-cast");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name");
+CheckFactories.registerCheck(
+"readability-misplaced-array-index");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
"readability-static-definition-in-anonymous-namespace");
CheckFactories.registerCheck(
Index: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
===
--- clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
+++ clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+//===--- MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h - clang-tidy-*- C++ -*-===//
+//
+// The LLVM Compiler Infrastructur
Re: [PATCH] D21134: clang-tidy: new check readability-misplaced-array-index
alexfh added a comment.
The check seems reasonable, I'm surprised there's no warning in Clang that
catches index[array] syntax ;)
A few comments re: implementation.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:43
@@ +42,3 @@
+
+static StringRef getAsString(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result,
+ const Expr *E) {
Looks like this repeats getText from clang/Tooling/FixIt.h.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:73
@@ +72,3 @@
+
+ D <<
FixItHint::CreateReplacement(ArraySubscriptE->getLHS()->getSourceRange(),
+RHSString);
Looks like you could use createReplacement and/or getText from
clang/Tooling/FixIt.h.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
