JonasToth added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/readability-static-const-method.cpp:209
+void KeepLambdas() {
+ auto F = +[]() { return 0; };
+ auto F2 = []() { return 0; };
----------------
mgehre wrote:
> JonasToth wrote:
> > Does it pass here?
> > I looks a bit weird, shouldnt the lambda be called for this to work (this
> > is the unary + right?)?
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18889028/a-positive-lambda-what-sorcery-is-this
Thank you C++ for showing my simple mindedness all the time :D
Its fine then and I will keep it in my mind for future test cases I check
against ;)
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/readability-static-const-method.cpp:312
+ return const_cast<DataPattern *>(this)->get();
+ }
+
----------------
mgehre wrote:
> JonasToth wrote:
> > I think more template tests wouldn't hurt. From the other checks experience
> > I can safely say we got burned a few times :)
> > Instantiating the templates with builtin arrays, pointers, references and
> > different qualifiers usually produces interesting test cases as well, that
> > need to be handled properly.
> >
> > Another thing that comes to mind with templates are overloaded operators.
> > ```
> > template <class Foo>
> > void bar() {
> > Foo x1, x2;
> > Foo y = x1 + x2;
> > }
> > ```
> > Builtins are not changed by `operator+` but that can not be said about
> > other types in general (maybe with concepts used properly).
> The check only checks templates instantiations (so we will see no template
> parameters, just ordinary types). The plus here will be be function call in
> the AST of the instantiation when Foo has an overloaded operator+.
> The current version will never propose to make bar() const when a method on
> `this` is called.
> I can add the test to show this.
Yes please add a test to show they are not analyzed.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61749/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D61749
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
