JonasToth added a comment. In D55044#1312438 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55044#1312438>, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> Thanks for working on this. > Semi-duplicate of D50852 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D50852> Please see > discussion there. > It should not be an abseil-specific check, the prefix (`std`,`abseil`), and > the function (`make_unique`) should be a config option, and it should likely > be a part of `modernize-use-auto`. I agree here. Instead of reimplementing the functionality we should rather refactor the existing check and make it flexible. It is possible to register the `absl` version of it with a different default-configuration so the refactoring will be the correct one. ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/abseil-make-unique.cpp:43 + + std::unique_ptr<int> b; + b.reset(new int(2)); ---------------- All your test cases seem to create only a single `unique_ptr`, please add cases like ``` std::unique_ptr<int> b1(new int(32)), b2(new int(42)); ``` From my experience in rewriting decls, they should be excluded. It is very cumbersome to get it right in all cases (think pointers, pointer to pointers, const, ...) and `readability-isolcate-declaration` exists to split variable declarations first. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55044/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55044 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
