flx added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/utils/DeclRefExprUtils.cpp:127
+ match(findAll(declRefExpr(equalsNode(&DeclRef),
+ unless(hasAncestor(stmt(anyOf(
+ forStmt(), cxxForRangeStmt(), whileStmt(),
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> flx wrote:
> > alexfh wrote:
> > > How will this work with lambdas / local classes declared inside a loop?
> > > Not sure if this case is going to happen in real code, but we'd better be
> > > clear about the limitations of the implementation.
> > Why would this not work? Could you give an example? The way the function is
> > written it handles my the use case for identifying when moving the
> > parameter is not safe, so I could also just move it into the
> > UnnecessaryValueParamCheck.
> I was thinking about a case where a loop this matcher finds is outside of the
> function definition and shouldn't be considered:
>
> void F() {
> for (;;) {
> struct C {
> void f(ExpensiveMovableType E) {
> auto F = E;
> }
> };
> }
> }
>
This case is not an issue in the check as we're passing f's body statement to
the hasLoopStmtAncestor function, so the search is scoped to f's body.
If you're concerned about the case where someone calls this with F's body but
expects it to be scoped to f I can just move this function into the check and
make it an implementation detail.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D27187
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
