This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL281206: [clang-tidy] readability-misplaced-array-index: add
new check that warns when… (authored by danielmarjamaki).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134?vs=69558&id=70994#toc
Repo
alexfh accepted this revision.
alexfh added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks good.
Please ensure it works reasonably on LLVM code before submitting.
Sorry for the delay. Feel free to ping earlier.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
_
danielmarjamaki marked 4 inline comments as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 69558.
danielmarjamaki marked 2 inline comments as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fix review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clan
alexfh requested changes to this revision.
alexfh added a comment.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
A few nits.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h:19
@@ +18,3 @@
+
+/// Warn about unusual array index syntax (index[array] instead of
+/// a
danielmarjamaki marked 6 inline comments as done.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:57
@@ +56,2 @@
+} // namespace tidy
+} // namespace clang
I removed hasMacroId() and use fixit::getText(). The replacements look good now.
==
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 69113.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fixed review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
alexfh requested changes to this revision.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:56
@@ +55,3 @@
+ if (hasMacroID(ArraySubscriptE) ||
+
!Result.SourceManager->isWrittenInSameFile(ArraySubscriptE->getLoc
danielmarjamaki marked an inline comment as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67338.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
ran clang-format
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.h
clang
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67337.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
More generic diagnostic. Diagnose all integerType[pointerType] expressions.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
jroelofs added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#509522, @danielmarjamaki wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote:
>
> > I think the replacement is wrong for something like:
> >
> > int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
> > offs1[arr + offs2] = 42;
> >
> >
> > wh
danielmarjamaki marked 2 inline comments as done.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:31
@@ +30,3 @@
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Why is this considered to be "normal syntax" and not worth getting a
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-misplaced-array-index.cpp:31
@@ +30,3 @@
+ x[10] = 0;
+ dostuff(0[0 + ABC]);
+}
Why is this considered to be "normal syntax" and not worth getting a diagnostic?
https://reviews.llvm.o
danielmarjamaki marked 4 inline comments as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
as far as I see the only unsolved review comment now is about macros. if it can
be handled better.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:28-29
@@ +27,4 @@
+
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67322.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
take care of review comments
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexChe
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote:
> I think the replacement is wrong for something like:
>
> int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
> offs1[arr + offs2] = 42;
>
>
> which I think would give:
>
> int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
> arr + offs2[offs
danielmarjamaki marked an inline comment as done.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508511, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> Is there a reason we don't want this check to be a part of the clang
> frontend, rather than as a clang-tidy check?
I discussed this with fronte
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48
@@ +47,3 @@
+
+ auto D =
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
alexfh wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Should not use `auto` here because the type is no
alexfh added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48
@@ +47,3 @@
+
+ auto D =
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
aaron.ballman wrote:
> Should not use `auto` here because the type is not spelled out in the
> i
alexfh added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134#508524, @jroelofs wrote:
> I think the replacement is wrong for something like:
>
> int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
> offs1[arr + offs2] = 42;
>
>
> which I think would give:
>
> int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
> arr + offs2[offs1] = 42;
jroelofs added a subscriber: jroelofs.
jroelofs added a comment.
I think the replacement is wrong for something like:
int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
offs1[arr + offs2] = 42;
which I think would give:
int *arr; int offs1, offs2;
arr + offs2[offs1] = 42;
If the precedence of the "indexing"
aaron.ballman added a subscriber: aaron.ballman.
aaron.ballman added a reviewer: aaron.ballman.
aaron.ballman added a comment.
Is there a reason we don't want this check to be a part of the clang frontend,
rather than as a clang-tidy check?
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/Mi
alexfh added a comment.
Thanks, that's better. Still a couple of comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:50
@@ +49,3 @@
+ diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(),
+ "unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []");
+
danielmarjamaki removed rL LLVM as the repository for this revision.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67145.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
Cleanup my previous commit. Ran clang-format.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/re
danielmarjamaki set the repository for this revision to rL LLVM.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 67144.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
Fixed review comments.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readab
danielmarjamaki added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:43
@@ +42,3 @@
+
+static StringRef getAsString(const MatchFinder::MatchResult &Result,
+ const Expr *E) {
alexfh wrote:
> Looks like
alexfh added a comment.
The check seems reasonable, I'm surprised there's no warning in Clang that
catches index[array] syntax ;)
A few comments re: implementation.
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:43
@@ +42,3 @@
+
+static StringRef getAsString(c
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 60804.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
fixed typo in releasenotes
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
Files:
clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp
clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.
danielmarjamaki removed rL LLVM as the repository for this revision.
danielmarjamaki updated this revision to Diff 60803.
danielmarjamaki added a comment.
updated releasedocs
deeper lookup if macro is used
only warn when the replacement can be done safely. the expressions "x[y+z]" and
y+z[x]" are
Eugene.Zelenko added a subscriber: Eugene.Zelenko.
Eugene.Zelenko added a comment.
Please mention this check in docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (in alphabetical order).
Repository:
rL LLVM
http://reviews.llvm.org/D21134
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-com
danielmarjamaki created this revision.
danielmarjamaki added a reviewer: alexfh.
danielmarjamaki added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
danielmarjamaki set the repository for this revision to rL LLVM.
this is a new check for clang-tidy that diagnoses when it see unusual array
index syntax.
there is no
32 matches
Mail list logo
