JonasToth added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/llvm/ProblematicStaticsCheck.cpp:33
+ const auto *VD = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<VarDecl>("var");
+ const auto *Return = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<ReturnStmt>("return");
+ diag(Return->getBeginLoc(), "address of static local variable %0 may not "
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> JonasToth wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > JonasToth wrote:
> > > > Please `assert` on `VD` and `Return`
> > > > Please assert on VD and Return
> > > Why?
> > because the matcher might evolve over time. Right now this can not be
> > triggered, that is correct. Asking for it was inappropriate but having it
> > doesn't hurt.
> All checks may evolve over time -- this isn't a pattern I'd like to see used
> in this sort of case, personally.
I don't insist.
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D54222
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
