sammccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/UnusedReturnValueCheck.cpp:98 + "::access;" + "::bind;" + "::connect;" ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > jranieri-grammatech wrote: > > alexfh wrote: > > > bind has a side effect and returns a success status. Thus, the result > > > being unused isn't necessarily a bug. Same for `connect`. And probably > > > for `setjmp` as well. > > In terms of bind, connect, and setjmp: while I personally would say that > > code not using the return value is bugprone, the data suggests that the > > vast majority of developers are using these functions in the intended > > manner and the false-positive rate should be low. > I think we have sufficient statistical data to suggest that these APIs should > be on the list because the majority of programmers *do not* use them solely > for side effects without using the return value, so my preference is to keep > them in the list. I stumbled upon this review as we're considering turning this check on by default in clangd. There's a significant difference between unused std::async() (programmer misunderstood contract) and unused ::connect() (ignoring error conditions). The former is ~never noise, and the latter may be (e.g. in experimental or incomplete code). So there's some value in separating these two lists out either as an option or a separate named check (bugprone-unhandled-error?) I think we probably wouldn't enable this check by default if it includes the error-code functions. > the majority of programmers *do not* use them solely for side effects ...in popular, distributed software :-) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76083/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76083 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
