================
@@ -130,18 +134,30 @@ void ExplicitConstructorCheck::check(const
MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result) {
return;
}
- if (Ctor->isExplicit() || Ctor->isCopyOrMoveConstructor() ||
+ if (ExplicitSpec.isExplicit() || Ctor->isCopyOrMoveConstructor() ||
TakesInitializerList)
return;
+ // Don't complain about explicit(false)
+ const Expr *ExplicitExpr = ExplicitSpec.getExpr();
+ if (ExplicitExpr) {
+ ExplicitExpr = ExplicitExpr->IgnoreImplicit();
+ if (isa<CXXBoolLiteralExpr>(ExplicitExpr))
+ return;
+ }
+
----------------
5chmidti wrote:
I think that dependent expressions (`isInstantiationDependent`) should also be
ignored, e.g.
```c++
template <int Val>
struct I {
explicit(Val > 0) I(int);
};
template <int Val>
struct J {
explicit(Val > 0) J(int);
};
void useJ(J<0>, J<100>);
```
should not produce any warnings IMO.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82689
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
