njames93 marked 2 inline comments as done. njames93 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/readability-qualified-auto.cpp:183 + + auto LambdaTest = [] { return 0; }; + // CHECK-MESSAGES-NOT: :[[@LINE-1]]:3: warning: 'auto LambdaTest' can be declared as 'auto *LambdaTest' ---------------- JonasToth wrote: > njames93 wrote: > > JonasToth wrote: > > > How does that beatiful code-construct get handled? > > > > > > ``` > > > auto * function_ptr = +[](int) {}; > > > ``` > > > The lambda is actually converted to a function pointer through the > > > `+`-operator. Not sure this happens anywhere, but it can happen. > > > So the case: > > > ``` > > > auto unnotice_ptr = +[](int) {}; > > > ``` > > > should be transformed. > > It gets handled the same as retty (*)(params), I should probably make > > function pointers in general not be converted > Ok. > There exist function references, too `int (&my_reference) (int);` ( i think > that was the syntax). > They should then follow this as well (+ user-facing documentation). You are right that there is a syntax like that, but if you try to bind one to an auto, it will decay to a pointer. If you bind one to an auto reference, then it will be just like the reference syntax above. In either case this won't trigger any replacements CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72217/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72217 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits