In http://reviews.llvm.org/D7639#192668, @danielmarjamaki wrote:
> sorry but I am personally skeptic about this checker. > > why is the void removed? > > it does not cause any wrong behaviour to keep it. > > the void is not likely added there by mistake, is it? the developer probably > wrote it by intention and this checker thinks that the developer intentions > are wrong.. > > how about moving it to clang-modernize? It is a readability check, it isn't designed to detect "wrong" behavior. (void) is a C-ism and is a holdover from C-style coding. It is completely redundant and unnecessary in C++. If a developer wants to keep unnecessary and redundant tokens in their code, then they can turn this check off or not run it. http://reviews.llvm.org/D7639 EMAIL PREFERENCES http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
