alexfh requested changes to this revision. alexfh added a comment. This revision now requires changes to proceed.
One important thing is missing. Please run this check on a large enough codebase (LLVM + Clang is a good choice for testing most of kinds of checks usually) and include a summary of results in the patch description. The most important things are: clang-tidy doesn't crash, results (or if there are too many, then a sufficiently large random sample - say, 100) look good on manual inspection. ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/cppcoreguidelines/NoMallocCheck.cpp:48 + if ((Call = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<CallExpr>("aquisition"))) + Recommendation = "consider a container or smart pointer"; + ---------------- nit: `a smart pointer` (an article is missing). ================ Comment at: clang-tidy/cppcoreguidelines/NoMallocCheck.cpp:49 + Recommendation = "consider a container or smart pointer"; + + else if ((Call = Result.Nodes.getNodeAs<CallExpr>("realloc"))) ---------------- Please remove empty lines before `else` Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D26167 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits