xbolva00 abandoned this revision.
xbolva00 added a comment.
This shouldn't be implemented here, better choice is clang-tidy. Closing this
revision.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52791
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
xbolva00 added a comment.
void test(void) {
int *a;
int* b;
}
TranslationUnitDecl
`-FunctionDecl line:4:6 test 'void ()'
`-CompoundStmt
|-DeclStmt
| `-VarDecl col:10 a 'int *'
`-DeclStmt
`-VarDecl col:10 b 'int *'
Why not 'int*' in ast dump?
rsmith added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52791#1254559, @rsmith wrote:
> int *ptr, (a), b, c;
>
Another possible heuristic for suppressing the check: only warn if there is
whitespace before the identifier. So:
int* a, b; // warning
int *a, b; // no warning
rsmith added a comment.
I think we need some documented guidelines on what is and is not an appropriate
warning for Clang. I think it's reasonable to warn in cases where we are
confident that the code means something other than what the programmer or a
later reader is likely to expect; it's
xbolva00 added a comment.
Yes, I am gonna work on it after I finish my some other patch :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52791
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
Rakete added a comment.
There's a false positive.
int **A, *B; // false positive: declaring a variable of type 'int *'; did you
mean to declare a pointer?
And IMO this should also warn:
int **A, B; // no warning currently
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52791
xbolva00 added a comment.
Any futher comments?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52791
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
