xazax.hun added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:30
+ " The old user defined 'RandomFunction' is not usable for 'shuffle'. You "
+ "need to "
+ "make additional changes if you want a specific random function.";
----------------
madsravn wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > Maybe it would be worth to reflow this literal.
> It seems a little weird, but this is the result of clang-format.
I usually just make it one big line and than clang format will do a better
reflow. By default it do not remove linebreaks, even if it could improve the
layout.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:70
+ llvm::raw_string_ostream Stream(Buffer);
+ DRef->printPretty(Stream, nullptr, Ctx.getPrintingPolicy());
+ StringRef StrRef(Stream.str());
----------------
madsravn wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > What about accessing the buffer of the source file instead of pretty
> > printing?
> How would you do this? printPretty was the best that I could find fitting my
> needs. If you have something better fitting, please share :)
I was thinking about something like getSourceText of Lexer.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:81
+ Stream << "shuffle(";
+ FirstArgument->printPretty(Stream, nullptr, Ctx.getPrintingPolicy());
+ Stream << ", ";
----------------
madsravn wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > Wouldn't just using the original source range of the argument work?
> > What about preserving the comments next to the arguments?
> I am not sure what you mean about the original source range. Can I just put
> that onto the Stream?
>
> Do you have an idea for the comments? Do you mean something like
>
>
> ```
> std::random_shuffle(
> vec.begin(), // Comment
> vec.end() // Comment
> );
> ```
Or even:
```
std::random_shuffle(vec.begin(), /*inlinecomment*/ vec.end());
```
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ReplaceRandomShuffleCheck.cpp:101
+
+ auto Diag = diag(MatchedCallExpr->getLocStart(), Message);
+ Diag << FixItHint::CreateRemoval(MatchedCallExpr->getSourceRange());
----------------
madsravn wrote:
> xazax.hun wrote:
> > You do not want to do fixits for code that is the result of macro
> > expansions.
> Why not? And how would I fix that?
Because that might cause the code not to compile when the macro is expanded in
a different context. It is a conservative approach but other tidy checkers
usually do this as well. You can use the isMacroID() method of the source
locations.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D30158
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
