cor3ntin added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp:6441
+ // Only warn for some functions deemed more frequent or problematic
+ static constexpr llvm::StringRef SpecialFunctions[] = {"move", "forward"};
+ auto it = llvm::find(SpecialFunctions, D->getName());
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
> cor3ntin wrote:
> > erichkeane wrote:
> > > I find myself a touch grumpy that this is used to keep this expandable to
> > > other std functions, but still sticks itself to unary functions
> > > (particularly when the function name
> > > `DiagnosedUnqualifiedCallsToStdFunctions` isn't unary-specific).
> > >
> > > I'm not sure how actionable this comment is, but I felt the need to
> > > share. I guess I could suggest moving this to the top and making this
> > > hold a 'pair' of args + name (plus presumably a "don't check arg count"
> > > for some sort of variadic function check).
> > >
> > > But, 'eh', think about it perhaps? Maybe this comment can just exist to
> > > help out the next person who wants to add something to this function.
> > To be honest, this is something I've considered, and I'll go in that
> > direction if you ask me to.
> > My thinking is that we do not have the need to do that right now, we can
> > expand on it when we want to, and in the meantime, bailing out early on
> > arity avoid wasting cpu cycles.
> Right, its the inconsistency between the two (being extra future-proof here,
> and being much-less future-proof above) that bugs me.
>
> Not enough to make you do anything here though.
Oh, i see.. I guess we could not have an array but that seemed cleaner. Or we
could find a less generic name for the function, if you want.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119670/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D119670
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
