whisperity added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-easily-swappable-parameters-len2.cpp:10
+
+void declaration(int Param, int Other); // NO-WARN: No chance to change this
function.
+
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I think this is a case where we could warn when the declaration is outside of
> a system header (perhaps as an option).
>
> Thinking about it a bit more, declarations and definitions provide a novel
> way to get another kind of swap:
> ```
> void func(int x, int y);
> void func(int y, int x) {} // Oops, the swap was probably not intentional
> ```
> which may or may not be interesting for a check (or its heuristics).
I gave this some thought. It is a very good idea, but I believe not for
//this// check, but D20689. What do you think of that? Maybe simply saying
"call site v. function node that was called" could be extended with a
completely analogous, string distance function based "function definition node
v. redecl chain" case.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
