PiotrZSL accepted this revision. PiotrZSL added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM, But: - Align check description before committing. - Consider adding some test with std::unique_ptr behind typedef. - Consider adding test with unique_ptr depend on template argument but without specializations (like f_tmpl but without f5 function). General issue that I got with this test (and test for shared_ptr) is that actually there is no issue here. For POD types it actually doesn't mater if you use `delete` or `delete[]`. This of course isn't portable and fall into implementation specific. But can read about this in https://itanium-cxx-abi.github.io/cxx-abi/abi.html#array-cookies This is why I would like to see NonPOD types instead of POD ones to be used with unique_ptr. On GCC/Clang memory will be fully released (POD) types or corrupted (non POD types). ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/UniquePtrArrayMismatchCheck.h:16-23 +/// Find `std::unique_ptr<T>(new T[...])`, replace it (if applicable) with +/// `std::unique_ptr<T[]>(new T[...])`. +/// +/// Example: +/// +/// \code +/// std::unique_ptr<int> PtrArr{new int[10]}; ---------------- this should be same as in release notes ("Finds initializations of C++ unique pointers to non-array type that are initialized with an array.") Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D151431/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D151431 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
