================
Comment at: clang-tidy/google/ExplicitConstructorCheck.cpp:61
@@ -55,6 +60,3 @@
       ClassTemplateDecl *Template = Specialization->getSpecializedTemplate();
-      // First use the fast getName() method to avoid unnecessary calls to the
-      // slow getQualifiedNameAsString().
-      return Template->getName() == "initializer_list" &&
-             Template->getQualifiedNameAsString() == "std::initializer_list";
+      return Template->getName() == "initializer_list";
     }
----------------
djasper wrote:
> I am fine with removing the extra-check here as I don't think it'll lead to a 
> significant amount of false negatives, but please mention that in the patch 
> description.
The main reason to remove the qualified name comparison was to make the check 
consistent with the newly added handling of instantiation-dependent argument 
types (where I was lazy to check qualified name).

After thinking a bit, I'll better make both consistent in a different way. PTAL.

================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/google-explicit-constructor.cpp:66
@@ -65,3 +65,3 @@
   explicit B(const ::std::initializer_list<char> &list5) {}
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:12: warning: initializer-list constructor 
should not be declared explicit [google-explicit-constructor]
+  // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE-1]]:12: warning: initializer-list constructor 
should not be declared explicit
   // CHECK-FIXES: {{^  }}B(const ::std::initializer_list<char> &list5) {}
----------------
djasper wrote:
> I recommend not checking the full error message every time. It is just too 
> much churn if the warning gets changed.
You're right. I removed the check name, but I can make the patterns even 
shorter.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D7431

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to