jpakkane marked an inline comment as done.
jpakkane added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/misc/InitLocalVariablesCheck.cpp:21
+  Finder->addMatcher(
+      varDecl(unless(hasInitializer(anything()))).bind("vardecl"), this);
+}
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> jpakkane wrote:
> > alexfh wrote:
> > > I believe, this should skip matches within template instantiations. 
> > > Consider this code:
> > > ```
> > > template<typename T>
> > > void f(T) { T t; }
> > > void g() {
> > >     f(0);
> > >     f(0.0);
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > 
> > > What will the fix  be?
> > I tested with the following function:
> > 
> > 
> > ```
> > template<typename T>
> > void template_test_function() {
> >   T t;
> >   int uninitialized;
> > }
> > ```
> > 
> > Currently it warns on the "uninitialized" variable regardless of whether 
> > the template is instantiated or not. If you call it with an int type, it 
> > will warn about variable t being uninitialized. If you call it with a, say, 
> > struct type, there is no warnings. Is this a reasonable approach?
> And what happens, if there are multiple instantiations of the same template, 
> each of them requiring a different fix? Can you try the check with my example 
> above (and maybe also add `f("");`inside `g()`). I believe, the check will 
> produce multiple warnings with conflicting fixes (and each of them will be 
> wrong, btw).
Interestingly it does warn about it, but only once, even if you have two 
different template specializations.

I tried to suppress this warning when the type being instantiated is a template 
argument type but no matter what I tried I could not get this to work. Is there 
a way to get this information from the MatchedDecl object or does one need to 
do something more complicated like going up the AST until a function definition 
is found and checking if it is a template specialization (presumably with 
TemplatedKind)? Any help would be appreciated.


Repository:
  rCTE Clang Tools Extra

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D64671/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D64671



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to