erichkeane added a comment.
I understand you still don't have commit-rights. If you'd like, I can push
this in a little bit. Just let me know the name/email you'd like me to use.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:6441
+ // Only warn for some functions deemed more frequent or problematic
+ static constexpr llvm::StringRef SpecialFunctions[] = {"move", "forward"};
+ auto it = llvm::find(SpecialFunctions, D->getName());
----------------
cor3ntin wrote:
> erichkeane wrote:
> > I find myself a touch grumpy that this is used to keep this expandable to
> > other std functions, but still sticks itself to unary functions
> > (particularly when the function name
> > `DiagnosedUnqualifiedCallsToStdFunctions` isn't unary-specific).
> >
> > I'm not sure how actionable this comment is, but I felt the need to share.
> > I guess I could suggest moving this to the top and making this hold a
> > 'pair' of args + name (plus presumably a "don't check arg count" for some
> > sort of variadic function check).
> >
> > But, 'eh', think about it perhaps? Maybe this comment can just exist to
> > help out the next person who wants to add something to this function.
> To be honest, this is something I've considered, and I'll go in that
> direction if you ask me to.
> My thinking is that we do not have the need to do that right now, we can
> expand on it when we want to, and in the meantime, bailing out early on arity
> avoid wasting cpu cycles.
Right, its the inconsistency between the two (being extra future-proof here,
and being much-less future-proof above) that bugs me.
Not enough to make you do anything here though.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119670/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119670
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
