================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/google-explicit-make-pair.cpp:18
@@ +17,3 @@
+void templ(T a, T b) {
+ std::make_pair<T, unsigned>(a, b);
+}
----------------
Benjamin Kramer wrote:
> Alexander Kornienko wrote:
> > I assume the check should suggest replacements in cases where there are no
> > dependent types, but could you add a test? And one more instantiation, so
> > that we actually test a case where something can go wrong due to templates.
> We completely ignore code in template instantiations at the moment. It would
> be nice to check for code in templates that does not contain any dependencies
> on the template arguments but it's not tricky to match (or do we have an
> ASTMatcher for it?)
Yes, we ignore code in template _instantiations_. However, template
_definitions_ are handled as usual. See a test for this in
test/clang-tidy/avoid-c-style-casts.cpp:78
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4497
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
