danielmarjamaki marked 12 inline comments as done.
================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-non-const-parameter.rst:6
@@ +5,3 @@
+
+Finds function parameters that should be const. When const is used properly,
+many mistakes can be avoided. Advantages when using const properly:
----------------
hokein wrote:
> Looks like what the document says isn't consistent with the check, since the
> check only finds non-const pointer parameter.
I changed "Finds function parameters.." to "Finds function pointer
parameters..".
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:3
@@ +2,3 @@
+
+// Currently the checker only warns about pointer arguments.
+//
----------------
hokein wrote:
> It makes sense to move this document to the `rst`, I think.
Done. First line in rst will now say: "Finds function pointer parameters that
should be const".
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:219
@@ +218,3 @@
+public:
+ C(int *p) : p(p) {}
+private:
----------------
hokein wrote:
> Please add a test case:
>
> ```
> class C {
> public:
> C(int *p) : p(p) {}
> private:
> const int *p;
> };
> ```
>
> BTW, does the check support class method?
Thanks, I added such class.
I also added one class that shows that class methods are supported.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D15332
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
