alexfh accepted this revision.
alexfh added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Looks good with a few comments.
Thanks for the new check! Do you think whether this could be a compiler warning
some day?
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/NewDeleteOverloadsCheck.cpp:52
@@ +51,3 @@
+
+ const FunctionProtoType *FPT = Node.getType()->castAs<FunctionProtoType>();
+ ASTContext &Ctx = Node.getASTContext();
----------------
nit: `const auto *FPT` would be better here to avoid duplication of the type
name.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/NewDeleteOverloadsCheck.h:22
@@ +21,3 @@
+class NewDeleteOverloadsCheck : public ClangTidyCheck {
+ std::map<const class clang::CXXRecordDecl *,
+ llvm::SmallVector<const class clang::FunctionDecl *, 4>> Overloads;
----------------
I wonder whether "class" here and below is actually needed. Did you try without
it?
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-new-delete-overloads.cpp:3
@@ +2,3 @@
+
+typedef unsigned int size_t;
+
----------------
I think, "unsigned long" should be used instead (and we might have to define it
differently for different platforms).
http://reviews.llvm.org/D13071
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
