zinovy.nis marked an inline comment as done.
zinovy.nis added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-redundant-branch-condition.cpp:1092
+ // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:5: warning: redundant condition 'isSet'
[bugprone-redundant-branch-condition]
+ // CHECK-FIXES: {{isSet}}
+ }
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> zinovy.nis wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > zinovy.nis wrote:
> > > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > > There's not a whole lot of context for FileCheck to determine if it's
> > > > > been correctly applied or not (same below) -- for instance, won't
> > > > > this pass even if no changes are applied because FileCheck is still
> > > > > going to find `isSet` in the file?
> > > > Thanks. Fixed.
> > > Maybe it's just early in the morning for me, but... I was expecting the
> > > transformation to be:
> > > ```
> > > if (RetT::Test(isSet).Ok() && isSet) {
> > > if (RetT::Test(isSet).Ok() && isSet) {
> > > }
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > turns into
> > > ```
> > > if (RetT::Test(isSet).Ok() && isSet) {
> > > }
> > > ```
> > > Why does it remove the `&& isSet` instead? That seems like it's changing
> > > the logic here from `if (true && false)` to `if (true)`.
> > IMO it's correct.
> > `isSet` cannot change its value between `if`s while
> > `RetT::Test(isSet).Ok()` can.
> > So we don't need to re-evaluate `isSet` and need to re-evaluate
> > `RetT::Test(isSet).Ok()` only.
> >
> >
> >
> > > That seems like it's changing the logic here from if (true && false) to
> > > if (true).
> >
> >
> > As I understand only the second `if` is transformed.
> Does this only trigger as a redundant branch condition if the definition of
> `RetT::Test()` is available? Because `Test()` takes a `bool&` so it sure
> seems like `isSet` could be modified between the branches if the definition
> isn't found because it's being passed as a non-const reference to `Test()`.
1)
> if the definition of RetT::Test() is available?
Removing the body from RetT::Test changes nothing.
2) Turning `RetT Test(bool &_isSet)` -> `RetT Test(bool _isSet)` also changes
nothing.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D91037/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D91037
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
