hokein added inline comments. ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/NonConstParameterCheck.cpp:24 @@ +23,3 @@ + + // C++ constructor.. + Finder->addMatcher(cxxConstructorDecl().bind("Ctor"), this); ---------------- Extra `.` at the end.
================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/NonConstParameterCheck.cpp:124 @@ +123,3 @@ +void NonConstParameterCheck::diagnoseNonConstParameters() { + for (auto It : Parameters) { + const ParmVarDecl *Par = It.first; ---------------- const auto &It ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/NonConstParameterCheck.h:53 @@ +52,3 @@ + /// and CanNotBeConst is true the Parameter is marked as not-const. + /// The CanNotBeConst are updated as sub expressions are visited. + void markCanNotBeConst(const Expr *E, bool CanNotBeConst); ---------------- s/are/is ================ Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-non-const-parameter.rst:6 @@ +5,3 @@ + +Finds function parameters that should be const. When const is used properly, +many mistakes can be avoided. Advantages when using const properly: ---------------- Looks like what the document says isn't consistent with the check, since the check only finds non-const pointer parameter. ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:3 @@ +2,3 @@ + +// Currently the checker only warns about pointer arguments. +// ---------------- It makes sense to move this document to the `rst`, I think. ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:15 @@ +14,3 @@ + +// CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:29: warning: parameter 'last' can be const [readability-non-const-parameter] +void warn1(int *first, int *last) { ---------------- Just keep the whole warning message in the first CHECK-MESSAGE. And remove `[readability-non-const-parameter]` in others CHECK-MESSAGE for keeping the line short. ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-non-const-parameter.cpp:219 @@ +218,3 @@ +public: + C(int *p) : p(p) {} +private: ---------------- Please add a test case: ``` class C { public: C(int *p) : p(p) {} private: const int *p; }; ``` BTW, does the check support class method? http://reviews.llvm.org/D15332 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits