================ @@ -0,0 +1,141 @@ +//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// +// +// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions. +// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information. +// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception +// +//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// + +#include "MethodHidingCheck.h" +#include "clang/ASTMatchers/ASTMatchFinder.h" +#include <stack> + +using namespace clang::ast_matchers; + +namespace clang::tidy::bugprone { + +namespace { + +bool sameBasicType(ParmVarDecl const *Lhs, ParmVarDecl const *Rhs) { + if (Lhs && Rhs) { + return Lhs->getType() + .getCanonicalType() + .getNonReferenceType() + .getUnqualifiedType() == Rhs->getType() + .getCanonicalType() + .getNonReferenceType() + .getUnqualifiedType(); + } + return false; +} + +bool namesCollide(CXXMethodDecl const &Lhs, CXXMethodDecl const &Rhs) { + if (Lhs.getNameAsString() != Rhs.getNameAsString()) { + return false; + } ---------------- t-a-james wrote:
I'm slightly surprised there isn't some automated tooling to detect this, like a backwards `readability-braces-around-statements` check. Reading around, there's a suggestion that removing brackets automatically is considered bad practice. However, if we're going to enforce this then it would be nice to have some automated tooling that at least warns about it. Would a backwards `readability-braces-around-statements` check be accepted upstream, with or without fixits? For this PR I've fixed it manually and this will be resolved when I next push. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/154746 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
