jankratochvil added a subscriber: labath. jankratochvil added a comment. In D71707#1791280 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71707#1791280>, @labath wrote:
> - disallowing casts to intptr_t seems too restrictive -- I doubt many people > are doing that, but I guess this type exists for a reason, and since the type > (and it's signedness) is spelled out in the source, it shouldn't be too > surprising that sign-extension can happen later I was trying to find what is `intptr_t` good for and I haven't found any valid reason. It seems to me nobody knows that either. Which is why I find correct to report it. This checker has many false positives (or "not really a bug") anyway. > - requiring a literal uintptr_t (or a typedef of it) may be also problematic > -- the user could obtain an integer type of the same bit width through some > other means (e.g. `#ifdef`). OTOH, without that (and just checking the bit > width for instance), one would have to actually compile for a 32-bit target > to get this warning. I don't know what's the practice for this in > clang-tidy... Yes, I wanted first to check the widths but then I realized user would need a 32-bit host for that which is too difficult to (1) get nowadays and (2) primarily to build there LLVM. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71707/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71707 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
