carlosgalvezp wrote:

Personally I don't really like this rule, especially in combination with 
`readability-static-accessed-through-instance`.

Now we have a mix of static and non-static functions in the classes, even 
though they are always called on a concrete object. One could argue that those 
static member functions can even be moved outside the class into the global 
namespace (maybe that would be a better fix?).

In general I believe static member functions should be a conscious, up-front 
architectural/design choice, i.e. I want the API of my code to look like 
`MyClass::myFunction()` because semantically it makes sense. It should not be a 
linter choice that can change with the implementation at any point in time.

But that's just my opinion, if others feel differently then so be it :) 

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/156265
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to