aaron.ballman closed this revision. aaron.ballman marked an inline comment as done. aaron.ballman added a comment.
Thanks! I've commit in r261324. ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/cert-flp30-c.c:6 @@ +5,3 @@ +void func(void) { + // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:37: warning: loop induction expression should not have floating-point type [cert-flp30-c] + for (float x = 0.1f; x <= 1.0f; x += 0.1f) { ---------------- hokein wrote: > I see in most of testcases, they are using `[[@LINE-1]]` instead of > `[[@LINE+1]]`. We'd better follow the `[[@LINE+1]]` way here. I've changed to using -1 instead of +1, but I don't think we have a hard and fast rule on location aside from "whatever makes the most sense." Given the compound blocks, I personally think +1 is more clear than -1, but meh. http://reviews.llvm.org/D17387 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits