aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantExternCheck.cpp:27
+void RedundantExternCheck::check(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result) {
+ auto* FD =
+ Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<FunctionDecl>("redundant_extern");
----------------
Formatting is incorrect (elsewhere too). You should run the patch through
clang-format.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantExternCheck.cpp:32
+
+ if(!(FD->getStorageClass() == SC_Extern))
+ return;
----------------
`FD->getStorageClass() != SC_Extern`
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantExternCheck.cpp:35
+
+ auto Diag = diag(FD->getBeginLoc(), "redundant 'extern' keyword");
+
----------------
How about "redundant 'extern' storage class specifier"?
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-redundant-extern.cpp:37
+
+void another_file_scope(int _extern);
----------------
More tests that I figured out:
```
namespace {
extern void f(); // 'extern' is not redundant
}
namespace a {
namespace {
namespace b {
extern void f(); // 'extern' is not redundant
}
}
}
// Note, the above are consequences of http://eel.is/c++draft/basic.link#6
#define FOO_EXTERN extern
typedef int extern_int;
extern_int FOO_EXTERN foo(); // 'extern' is redundant, but hopefully we don't
try to fixit this to be '_int FOO_EXTERN foo();'
// The above is a weird consequence of how specifiers are parsed in C and C++
```
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33841/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33841
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
