JonasToth added a comment.
Hi IdrissRio,
thanks for working on this! I have one question: Why are variables _not_
considered in the check but only constants? IMHO it would make sense to
transform these as well.
I dont have time for long review today anymore, I will continue tomorrow.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/NumericalCostantsToMaxIntCheck.cpp:22
+namespace {
+class NumericalConstCheckPPCallbacks : public PPCallbacks {
+public:
----------------
Unfortunatly this is duplicated effort.
Please take a look at `cppcoreguidelines/ProBoundsConstantArrayIndexCheck.cpp`
and
`utils/IncludeInserter.{h,cpp}` to add new includes from clang-tidy
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/NumericalCostantsToMaxIntCheck.cpp:90
+ const auto *Lit = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<IntegerLiteral>("Lit");
+ if (Decl == nullptr || Lit == nullptr)
+ return;
----------------
Is failure here expected? The matcher should match both nodes simultanously, if
so please use an `assert` instead to detect unexpected failures
================
Comment at:
docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-numerical-costants-to-max-int.rst:16
+
+unsigned const long int x = -1;
+
----------------
please indent that code, otherwise its is rendered incorrect
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52892
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
