carlosgalvezp added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone/dangling-handle.cpp:55-56 - operator basic_string_view() const noexcept; + typedef basic_string_view str_view; + operator str_view() const noexcept; ---------------- Right now the test will no longer test classes that have the conversion operator written explicitly instead of via typedef. Do you think it's worth keeping the other implementation as well, or can we safely assume that `basic_string` is always implemented like this? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148418/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D148418 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
