alexfh requested changes to this revision.
alexfh added inline comments.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/UseAutoCheck.cpp:290
+ : ClangTidyCheck(Name, Context), RemoveStars(Options.get("RemoveStars",
0)),
+ MinTypeNameLength(Options.get("MinTypeNameLength", 0)) {}
----------------
lebedev.ri wrote:
> zinovy.nis wrote:
> > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > alexfh wrote:
> > > > Maybe make the default 5? Or does anyone really want to replace
> > > > `int/long/char/bool/...` with `auto`?
> > > That might be a bit surprising behavioral change..
> > > At least it should be spelled out in the release notes.
> > > (my 5 cent: defaulting to 0 would be best)
> > Maybe we can somehow mention the current option value in a warning message?
> Sure, can be done, but that will only be seen when it does fire, not when it
> suddenly stops firing...
> Maybe we can somehow mention the current option value in a warning message?
We don't do that for options of other checks (and for the other option here). I
don't think this case is substantially different.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/UseAutoCheck.cpp:290
+ : ClangTidyCheck(Name, Context), RemoveStars(Options.get("RemoveStars",
0)),
+ MinTypeNameLength(Options.get("MinTypeNameLength", 0)) {}
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> lebedev.ri wrote:
> > zinovy.nis wrote:
> > > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > > alexfh wrote:
> > > > > Maybe make the default 5? Or does anyone really want to replace
> > > > > `int/long/char/bool/...` with `auto`?
> > > > That might be a bit surprising behavioral change..
> > > > At least it should be spelled out in the release notes.
> > > > (my 5 cent: defaulting to 0 would be best)
> > > Maybe we can somehow mention the current option value in a warning
> > > message?
> > Sure, can be done, but that will only be seen when it does fire, not when
> > it suddenly stops firing...
> > Maybe we can somehow mention the current option value in a warning message?
>
> We don't do that for options of other checks (and for the other option here).
> I don't think this case is substantially different.
> That might be a bit surprising behavioral change..
For many it will be a welcome change ;)
> At least it should be spelled out in the release notes.
No objections here.
> (my 5 cent: defaulting to 0 would be best)
You see it, 5 is a better default, otherwise you'd say "0 cent" ;)
On a serious note, the style guides I'm more or less familiar with recommend
the use of `auto` for "long/cluttery type names" [1], "if and only if it makes
the code more readable or easier to maintain" [2], or to "save writing a
longish, hard-to-remember type that the compiler already knows but a programmer
could get wrong" [3]. None of these guidelines seem to endorse the use of
`auto` instead of `int`, `bool` or the like.
From my perspective, the default value of 5 would cover a larger fraction of
real-world use cases.
[1] https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#auto
[2]
http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-auto-type-deduction-to-make-code-more-readable
[3]
https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#es11-use-auto-to-avoid-redundant-repetition-of-type-names
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/UseAutoCheck.cpp:420-421
+ if (MinTypeNameLength != 0 &&
+ Lexer::getSourceText(CharSourceRange::getTokenRange(Range),
+ Context->getSourceManager(), Context->getLangOpts())
+ .size() < MinTypeNameLength)
----------------
Consider using tooling::fixit::getText(Loc, Context) instead.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D45405
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
