courbet reclaimed this revision.
courbet added a comment.
Actually, thinking more about this, adding this to the existing warning might
not be a very consensual change. In the case of the warning:
S<T> f() {
T&& t = ...;
...
return t;
}
there is no argument against doing the std::move(): the code is just as clear
and has better performance:
S<T> f() {
T&& t = ...;
...
return std::move(t);
}
In the case of a const variable, some people might value the safety from the
const above the performance:
S<T> f() {
const T t = ...;
... // here be dragons
return t;
}
And they would be unhappy if the -Wreturn-std-move started warning about this.
So I think there are two options here:
- Add a new warning, or
- Add it as a clang-tidy as in this change.
What do you think ?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D70390/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D70390
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
