JonasToth added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/cppcoreguidelines-use-raii-locks.cpp:4
+// Mock implementation of std::mutex
+namespace std {
+struct mutex {
----------------
lewmpk wrote:
> JonasToth wrote:
> > Please add more tests
> >
> > What happens for this?
> > ```
> > void foo() {
> > std::mutex m;
> > m.lock();
> > m.unlock();
> > m.lock();
> > m.unlock();
> > m.try_lock();
> > m.lock();
> > m.unlock();
> > }
> > ```
> >
> > - Please add tests for templates, where the lock-type is a template
> > parameter
> > - please add tests where the locking happens within macros
> > - please add tests for usage within loops
> > - where cases like `std::mutex m1; std::mutex &m2 = m1; // usage`. This
> > should not be diagnosed, right?
> I've added a test case for your example, templates, macros and loops.
> I can't catch the case `std::mutex m1; std::mutex &m2 = m1; // usage`, but i
> can catch trivial cases.
Yes, your not supposed to catch those. But i feel things like this should be
documented. In theory catching this particular case is possible (we do similar
analysis for `const`.
But it is totally acceptable to leave as is!
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D58818/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D58818
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
