aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/DuplicatedAccessSpecifiersCheck.cpp:21
+void DuplicatedAccessSpecifiersCheck::registerMatchers(MatchFinder *Finder) {
+ Finder->addMatcher(
+ cxxRecordDecl(has(accessSpecDecl()))
----------------
You should only register this matcher in C++ mode.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/DuplicatedAccessSpecifiersCheck.cpp:31
+
+ AccessSpecDecl const *lastAccessDecl = nullptr;
+ for (DeclContext::specific_decl_iterator<AccessSpecDecl>
----------------
Please switch to `const AccessSpecDecl *`. Also, that should be
`LastAccessDecl` per the naming conventions.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/DuplicatedAccessSpecifiersCheck.cpp:33
+ for (DeclContext::specific_decl_iterator<AccessSpecDecl>
+ NS(MatchedDecl->decls_begin()),
+ NSEnd(MatchedDecl->decls_end());
----------------
Why `NS` -- that seems like a strange naming choice.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/DuplicatedAccessSpecifiersCheck.cpp:36
+ NS != NSEnd; ++NS) {
+ const auto *decl = *NS;
+
----------------
Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> Type is not obvious here, so please don't use auto.
Also, `decl` doesn't match our naming conventions -- change to `ASDecl`?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55793/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55793
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
