aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/cppcoreguidelines/ProTypeMemberInitCheck.cpp:484
+ AnyMemberHasInitPerUnion, [&](const FieldDecl *F) {
if (!FieldsToInit.count(F))
return;
----------------
Given that we're touching this code, we might as well make clang-format happy
with it (though I can't quite spot what it wants changed, so if it turns out to
be a bad idea for some reason, I don't insist).
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-member-init.cpp:526
+ union {
+ int K;
+ };
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Can you add a `CHECK-FIXES-NOT` that we're not adding the fix for this case?
I think you missed this request? Same for the one immediately below.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/cppcoreguidelines-pro-type-member-init.cpp:534
+
+union U2 {
+ U2() {}
----------------
Sockke wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > A related interesting test would be:
> > ```
> > union U3 {
> > U3() {}
> >
> > struct {
> > int B;
> > } b;
> > int A;
> > };
> > ```
> > I would expect `A` or `b` to need initialization for the union, and `B` to
> > need initialization for the struct.
> > A related interesting test would be:
> > ```
> > union U3 {
> > U3() {}
> >
> > struct {
> > int B;
> > } b;
> > int A;
> > };
> > ```
> > I would expect `A` or `b` to need initialization for the union, and `B` to
> > need initialization for the struct.
>
> I apologize for the delay in responding. It seems to me that `struct {}b` has
> no user-defined constructor, so all members are initialized to their
> defaults, it is unnecessary to initialize `B` explicitly.
Okay, fair point!
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D108370/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D108370
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
