alexshap added a comment. > Are you talking about a more conservative warning or a more conservative > fixit? If it doesn't make sense for us to have a fixit for a particular > capture, does it make sense for us to have a warning for that >capture in the > first place?
to be honest i'm more concerned with the fixit (so basically to avoid breaking the code - especially if these modifications are applied at scale, the code might be get broken silently and will be hard to find later, so I'd start with handling only simple cases where it's a strictly positive change)) ) > It would be helpful to add some tests with macros to ensure that the logic > for how the removal range is computed can handle macros. (E.g. macro that > expands to a full/partial capture, lambda in a macro). +1 Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D48845 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
