rsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:116-134
@@ +115,21 @@
+
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:18: warning: parameter 'p' can be const
+int return1(int *p) {
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^}}int return1(const int *p) {{{$}}
+ return *p;
+}
+
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:25: warning: parameter 'p' can be const
+const int *return2(int *p) {
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^}}const int *return2(const int *p) {{{$}}
+ return p;
+}
+
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:25: warning: parameter 'p' can be const
+const int *return3(int *p) {
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{^}}const int *return3(const int *p) {{{$}}
+ return p + 1;
+}
+
+// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:27: warning: parameter 'p' can be const
+const char *return4(char *p) {
----------------
The wording of this warning, and the name of the check, are highly misleading.
It's *not* the parameter that can be const, it's the parameter's *pointee*.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D15332
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
