vabridgers added a comment. Thanks all for the prompt and actionable comments. I will address all comments directly and 1-1, but would like to bottom out on one point before driving this forward. @lebedev.ri commented this should be in the Clang front end rather than a tidy check. Can we reach a consensus on that comment before I proceed with either a tidy check renamed to bugprone (comment from @Eugene.Zelenko ) or implement this check in the front end, enabled only when all warnings are enabled? I had considered both approaches when I started this, and thought the tidy checker was the best first step.
Also, @njames93, I take your point the expression does have a mathematical meaning. I was following the gcc warning message for the same expression, but we can cast the warning however we like :) Do you have a suggestion about the warning? I like the general idea of a suggestion to use parenthesis to remove the ambiguity. Thanks! - Vince Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84898/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84898 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
