An update: I didn't find a single bug with this check in a large codebase. Turns out that it's rather useless. I'm inclined to kill it.
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Alexander Kornienko <ale...@google.com> wrote: > I've also found a bunch of similar cases in our codebase, and I'm trying > to figure out whether the pattern can be narrowed down to just dangerous > cases. If we don't find a way to do so, we'll probably have to resort to > "// NOLINT" to shut clang-tidy up. > On 13 Sep 2015 10:52, "Kim Gräsman" <kim.gras...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Late to the party, but I wanted to ask: is there a way to indicate to >> the checker that we really *did* mean sizeof()? >> >> I think I've stumbled over code in our code base that uses >> sizeof(container) to report memory usage statistics and it seems >> valid, so it'd be nice if this checker could be silenced on a >> case-by-case basis. >> >> Thanks, >> - Kim >> >> On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 12:09 AM, Alexander Kornienko via cfe-commits >> <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> > Indeed. But this has been fixed before I could get to it. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits >> > <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> aaron.ballman added a comment. >> >> >> >> This appears to have broken one of the bots: >> >> >> >> http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/ninja-x64-msvc-RA-centos6/builds/15065 >> >> >> >> >> >> http://reviews.llvm.org/D12759 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> cfe-commits mailing list >> >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >> >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > cfe-commits mailing list >> > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org >> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> > >> >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
