njames93 added a comment. In D71846#1800381 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71846#1800381>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D71846#1800344 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71846#1800344>, @njames93 wrote: > > > I'm in two minds about issuing a warning when scope restrictions prevent a > > fix. Do you think creating an option to enable or disable emitting warnings > > for cases where the scope prevents a fix would be a good idea? > > > It's not uncommon for fixits to only be generated under specific > circumstances, so I'm wondering what your concern is with warning when we > can't provide a fixit? The cases I am thinking about all seem reasonable to > diagnose (are true positives) without fixing, but maybe you have different > circumstances in mind. Right now an issue is raised for every else after return flag, but not all else after return flags can be fixed due to declaration statements and scope issues. My suggestion is that you can choose to warn about those cases or not. For example a developer may want else after return for when they need to limit the scope and getting a warning for it may be undesirable. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71846/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71846 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
