aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/performance/UnnecessaryValueParamCheck.cpp:131
*Result.Context);
- if (!IsConstQualified)
+ if (!CurrentParam.getType().getCanonicalType().isConstQualified())
Diag << utils::fixit::changeVarDeclToConst(CurrentParam);
----------------
You should add a comment here explaining why you need something more complex
than `IsConstQualified`.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/performance-unnecessary-value-param.cpp:242
+// Case where parameter in declaration is already const-qualified but not in
+// implementation. Make sure a second 'const' is not added to the declaration.
+void PositiveConstDeclaration(const ExpensiveToCopyType A);
----------------
flx wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > This comment doesn't really match the test cases. The original code has two
> > *different* declarations (only one of which is a definition), not one
> > declaration and one redeclaration with the definition.
> >
> > I think what is really happening is that it is adding the `&` qualifier to
> > the first declaration, and adding the `const` and `&` qualifiers to the
> > second declaration, and the result is that you get harmonization. But it
> > brings up a question to me; what happens with:
> > ```
> > void f1(ExpensiveToCopyType A) {
> > }
> >
> > void f1(const ExpensiveToCopyType A) {
> >
> > }
> > ```
> > Does the fix-it try to create two definitions of the same function?
> Good catch. I added the reverse case as well and modified the check slightly
> to make that case work as well.
Can you add a test like this as well?
```
void f1(ExpensiveToCopyType A); // Declared, not defined
void f1(const ExpensiveToCopyType A) {}
void f1(const ExpensiveToCopyType &A) {}
```
I'm trying to make sure this check does not suggest a fixit that breaks
existing code because of overload sets. I would expect a diagnostic for the
first two declarations, but no fixit suggestion for `void f1(const
ExpensiveToCopyType A)` because that would result in an ambiguous function
definition.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26207
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
