aaron.ballman added a comment. In D70052#1741246 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D70052#1741246>, @gbencze wrote:
> In D70052#1740235 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D70052#1740235>, @Eugene.Zelenko > wrote: > > > If this is CERT rule, why check is not placed in relevant module? > > > To be honest I was hoping for some feedback on this as I wasn't sure what the > best place for this check would be. Quite a few CERT rules seem to be > implemented in other modules and have cert aliases. > Do you think this check should be moved there or should I just add an alias? I'd probably implement this only in the `cert` module, but if we wanted to expose it outside of there as well, I'd suggest `bugprone`. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/misc-mutating-copy.cpp:107 +}; +} // namespace test_mutating_other_object ---------------- I think a case like this should also diagnose: ``` class S { int a; public: void fine_func() const; void questionable_func(); void bad_func() { a = 12; } S(S& other) : a(other.a) { other.fine_func(); // This is fine other.bad_func(); // This is a problem other.questionable_func(); // Not certain what to do here. } bool operator==(const S& other) { return a == other.a; } }; ``` CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D70052/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D70052 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
