================
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s bugprone-inc-dec-in-conditions %t
+
+#define foo(x) \
+ ({ \
+ _BitInt(5) y = x; \
+ 16777215wb ?: ++y; \
+ })
+
+_BitInt(8) v_401_0() { 0 && foo(0); }
----------------
DonatNagyE wrote:
Perhaps eliminate the macro definition and replace this function body with
```
if (0) {
// block defined in the macro
}
```
because the current code seems to be "unnatural" for the untrained eye. (If I
understand it correctly, this transformation would produce an equivalent
testcase. If not, then explain why do you need the gcc statement expression.)
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/65889
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
