sbenza added a comment. > I will separate it, OK. In the Clang there is one use case that I fixed, > although it did not break the tests. Neither of the other "has..." checkers > (except the general ones) ignore implicit casts and parenthesized expressions > so this one should not do it either because it makes checking implicit casts > impossible.
I agree that we want it, just wanted to point out that it has to be done with care. > Matcher "hasReturnValue" is needed because "has" ignores all implicit casts > and parenthesized expressions and we need to the check implicit casts. I will > add a test and add it to the dynamic registry. I see. has() suffers from the same problem. Then it makes sense. http://reviews.llvm.org/D17986 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
