ymandel accepted this revision.
ymandel added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
To other reviewers: barring any additional comments, I will push this patch
tomorrow morning (CJ doesn't have commit rights).
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-stringview-nullptr.cpp:117-130
+ // (void)(const std::string_view(nullptr)) /* a6 */;
+ // CV qualifiers do not compile in this context
+
+ // (void)(const std::string_view((nullptr))) /* a7 */;
+ // CV qualifiers do not compile in this context
+
+ // (void)(const std::string_view({nullptr})) /* a8 */;
----------------
nit: personally, i'd just delete these -- anything that doens't compile isn't
really of interest to clang tidy. While I see the educational value, these
kinds of comments are prone to bitrot (since we're not actually testing
anything) and therefore have questionable value even for education.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-stringview-nullptr.cpp:134-147
+ // (void)(const std::string_view{nullptr}) /* a16 */;
+ // CV qualifiers do not compile in this context
+
+ // (void)(const std::string_view{(nullptr)}) /* a17 */;
+ // CV qualifiers do not compile in this context
+
+ // (void)(const std::string_view{{nullptr}}) /* a18 */;
----------------
CJ-Johnson wrote:
> ymandel wrote:
> > what are these lines doing?
> These lines are not "tests" themselves but they clearly document that all of
> the various permutations have been considered. If someone reads the test file
> and thinks "what about this other case?", these demonstrate that such other
> cases have been considered but are not valid :)
ah, i see. maybe put in a comment to that respect?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113148/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D113148
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
