I have to say I disagree that either the nested struct/function or macros (in any form) should count toward a function's total variable count.
Both are valid forms of abstraction, and they both remove complexity from the containing function since they factor details *out of the function's immediate lexical contents* (I avoid 'scope' as macros do pollute the scope) in a way that improves readability. There are cases where macros can make things more complex but it seems unfair to flag variables declared by macros as making expanding functions more complex. In short, I think I agree with Aaron's last example classifications. - Kim Den tors 22 mars 2018 14:56Eugene Zelenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits < cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> skrev: > Eugene.Zelenko added inline comments. > > > ================ > Comment at: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:127 > > +- Added `VariableThreshold` option to `readability-function-size > + < > http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability-function-size.html>`_ > check > ---------------- > Please rebase from trunk and use //:doc:// for link. > > > Repository: > rCTE Clang Tools Extra > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D44602 > > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
