aaron.ballman accepted this revision. aaron.ballman added a comment. LGTM!
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/ArgumentCommentCheck.cpp:240 + Arg = Arg->IgnoreImpCasts(); + if (isa<UnaryOperator>(Arg)) + Arg = cast<UnaryOperator>(Arg)->getSubExpr(); ---------------- xyb wrote: > aaron.ballman wrote: > > The bug claims that this is only for handling negative literals, but this > > allows any unary operator. Is that intentional? If we're going to allow > > arbitrary unary operators, why not arbitrary binary operators as well? > Actually, it handles "UnaryOperator Literal". So it will handle "+12", "-12", > "~12". I can restrict it for UO_MINUS only, but is it real necessary? It's not that it's necessary, it's that I'm wondering why we think `-12` is special but `0 - 12` is not, but that can be done incrementally later. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67084/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67084 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
