https://github.com/5chmidti requested changes to this pull request.
I think that this check is one that we don't want to emit fixes for, at least not in the main diagnostic, but maybe as a fixit attached to a note. Sort of like: ``` warning: ... note: (be more explicit and) use '= nullptr' ``` The diagnostic message is also too generic and does not say what the problem is. One potential wording could be: `be explicit when calling 'reset()' on a smart-pointer with a pointee that has a 'reset()' method` What do others think? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121291 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
