Paul =?utf-8?q?Heidekrüger?= <paul.heidekrue...@tum.de>, Paul =?utf-8?q?Heidekrüger?= <paul.heidekrue...@tum.de>, Paul =?utf-8?q?Heidekrüger?= <paul.heidekrue...@tum.de>, Paul =?utf-8?q?Heidekrüger?= <paul.heidekrue...@tum.de>, Paul =?utf-8?q?Heidekrüger?= <paul.heidekrue...@tum.de> Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <llvm.org/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95...@github.com>
carlosgalvezp wrote: > Rename the analysis from AvoidBoundsErrorsCheck to > PreferAtOverSubscriptOperatorCheck as requested by @PiotrZSL I'm strongly opposed to this, because it's conflating "how to solve the problem" with "what the problem is". If we want to focus on the problem, the check could be named "AvoidSubscriptOperator". This way, the solution to the problem is open for users to decide. > discussed the possibility of disabling the check when exceptions are > disabled, I don't think this is a good idea, as it introduces a dependency towards Clang compiler. And it's a lot more complicated than what I'm proposing. I would appreciate more elaboration as to why this check *must* use at() and cannot be made optional. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95220 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
