lebedev.ri added inline comments.
================ Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-magic-numbers.rst:61-63 +configuration for accepted floating point values, primarily because most +floating point comparisons are not exact, and some of the exact ones are not +portable. ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > 0x8000-0000 wrote: > > aaron.ballman wrote: > > > I am curious to know how true this is. You got some data for integer > > > values and reported it, but I'm wondering if you've tried the same > > > experiment with floating-point numbers? > > The problem with the floating point numbers as text is: they need to be > > parsed both from the configuration and from the source code _then_ > > compared. What is an acceptable epsilon? I don't know. Is the same epsilon > > acceptable on all source code? I don't know. > Yeah, I'm not too worried about the situations in which the epsilon matters. > I'm more worried that we'll see a lot of 1.0, 2.0 floating-point literals > where the floating-point value is a nice, round, easy-to-represent number but > users have no way to disable this diagnostic short of `const float Two = > 2.0f;` Random thought: the types that are ignored should/could be configurable, i.e. there should be a switch whether or not to complain about floats. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D49114 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
