shuaiwang added inline comments.
================
Comment at: unittests/clang-tidy/ExprMutationAnalyzerTest.cpp:309
+TEST(ExprMutationAnalyzerTest, CallUnresolved) {
+ auto AST =
----------------
JonasToth wrote:
> I think we are missing tests for non-type template paramters (`template
> <size_t N>`). They should behave the same. But the following case would not
> be a mutation:
>
> ```
> void non_mutating(const char* Array, int size) { /* Foo */ }
> template <int N>
> struct ArrayLike {
> char* data[N]; // Initialized to something
> void SomeFunction() {
> non_mutating(data, N);
> }
> };
> ```
>
> The difference between the 'normal' and non-type templates would be, that `N`
> is not mutatable at all and the semantics is clear (builtin integer-like
> type).
>
> If the current implementation would not figure that out, you can just add a
> test for it and assume a mutation. Handling non-type templates later is
> absolutly ok.
We have to assume `data` is mutated here as well. I'll add a test case for this.
```
void g(const char*, int); // <-- doesn't mutate
void g(char(&)[8], int); // <-- do mutate
template <int N>
void f() {
char data[N];
g(data, N); // <-- we don't know which `g` will be called yet
}
void h() {
f<8>(); // <-- f calls g(char(&)[8], int) internally
f<9>(); // <-- f calls g(const char*, int) internally
}
```
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D50619
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
