khuttun added a comment. In D46317#2027071 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D46317#2027071>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D46317#2023406 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D46317#2023406>, @khuttun wrote: > > > Any comments on this? Is this checker something that could be part of > > clang-tidy? > > > Thank you for posting some of the diagnostics found by the check, that was > really helpful information! I spot-checked ~10 of the issues it reported and > all of them were false positives. Were you able to find any true positives > from that list? I think 1200 reports without any true positives indicates > that the check may be too chatty to include (it may also suggest that > `bugprone` is the wrong place for the check). It's difficult to spot actual functionality bugs without knowing the code better, but there's plenty of unnecessary double-lookups (count()/find() + operator[]) reported, for example: clang-tools-extra/clang-reorder-fields/ReorderFieldsAction.cpp:75:30 clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/ForwardDeclarationNamespaceCheck.cpp:157:33 clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/modernize/DeprecatedHeadersCheck.cpp:106:29 CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D46317/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D46317 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
