aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/UseDefaultMemberInitCheck.cpp:161
cxxBoolLiteral(), cxxNullPtrLiteralExpr(), implicitValueInitExpr(),
- declRefExpr());
+ declRefExpr(unless(to(varDecl()))));
----------------
malcolm.parsons wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > malcolm.parsons wrote:
> > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > Any `varDecl`? Or do we want to limit it to only `parmVarDecl` instead?
> > > > ```
> > > > int i = 12;
> > > > struct S {
> > > > int j;
> > > > S() : j(i) {}
> > > > };
> > > > ```
> > > > It seems reasonable to suggest the member initialization be "fixed" to:
> > > > `int j = i;`
> > > I would find a default member initializer that is not a constant to be
> > > surprising.
> > > Maybe I want to limit it to `enumConstantDecl`.
> > I wouldn't; consider a global synchronization object, like a mutex (this is
> > a relatively common thing).
> Note that this check doesn't consider initializations of members that are
> classes, e.g. `std::lock_guard`.
> I have no plans to make it consider them.
Ah, okay, then it's less pressing, though the pattern is still not unheard of
for non-class types. I don't have a strong opinion any longer, though.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/modernize-use-default-member-init.cpp:224
+struct NegativeDefaultArg
+{
----------------
Can we also have a positive test with an enumerator?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28287
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
