JonasToth added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/SimplifyBooleanExprCheck.cpp:386
- bool BoolValue = Bool->getValue();
+ const bool BoolValue = Bool->getValue();
----------------
`const` on values is uncommon in clang-tidy code. Please keep that consistent.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/SimplifyBooleanExprCheck.cpp:743
+ // if the next statement after the if contains a return statement of
+ // the correct form. Ideally we'd be able to express this with the
+ // matchers, but that is currently impossible.
----------------
double space
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/SimplifyBooleanExprCheck.cpp:745
+ // matchers, but that is currently impossible.
+ //
+ const auto *If = dyn_cast<IfStmt>(SwitchCase->getSubStmt());
----------------
redundant empty comment line
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/SimplifyBooleanExprCheck.cpp:747
+ const auto *If = dyn_cast<IfStmt>(SwitchCase->getSubStmt());
+ assert(If != nullptr);
+ const CXXBoolLiteralExpr *Lit = stmtReturnsBool(If, Negated);
----------------
I think this assertion does not hold true from the matcher.
The matcher requires only `hasDescendent(ifStmt())`, but that does not ensure
the first stmt is the `ifStmt`.
e.g.
```
case 10: {
loggingCall();
if(foo) ...
```
Is this excluded?
}
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56303/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56303
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
