alexfh added a comment.
LG
================
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) {
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> 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.
Yep, I don't think we're trying to be consistent with placing check lines
before or after the checked location. Not that it matters much.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D17387
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
