aaron.ballman added a subscriber: aaron.ballman. aaron.ballman added a reviewer: aaron.ballman. aaron.ballman added a comment.
Is there a reason we don't want this check to be a part of the clang frontend, rather than as a clang-tidy check? ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:27-28 @@ +26,4 @@ + hasRHS(ignoringParenImpCasts( + anyOf(stringLiteral(), declRefExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType()))), + memberExpr(hasType(pointsTo(qualType()))))))) + .bind("expr"), ---------------- Can this use `hasType(pointerType())` instead of `hasType(pointsTo(qualType()))` ? ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:48 @@ +47,3 @@ + + auto D = + diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(), ---------------- Should not use `auto` here because the type is not spelled out in the initialization. ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:50 @@ +49,3 @@ + diag(ArraySubscriptE->getLocStart(), + "unusual array index syntax, usually the index is inside the []"); + ---------------- alexfh wrote: > I'd say "confusing" instead of "unusual". This would also help avoiding the > repetition ("unusual ..., usually ..."): > > "confusing array index syntax; usually, the index is inside the brackets" Instead of "array index syntax", perhaps "array subscript expression"? ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/MisplacedArrayIndexCheck.cpp:52 @@ +51,3 @@ + + // Don't even try to resolve macro or include contraptions. Not worth emitting + // a fixit for. ---------------- What does "contraptions" mean in this context? https://reviews.llvm.org/D21134 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits