aaron.ballman added a comment. Once you fix the typo in the check, can you run it over some large C++ code bases to see if it finds any results?
================ Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/DefaultNumericsCheck.cpp:30 + ofClass(classTemplateSpecializationDecl( + hasName("::std::numeric_limit"), + unless(isExplicitTemplateSpecialization()), ---------------- This should be checking for `::std::numeric_limits` (plural). ================ Comment at: docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:77 + <http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/misc-default-numerics.html>`_ check + Finds uses of ``std::numeric_limit<T>`` for unspecialized types + ---------------- numeric_limits ================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-default-numerics.cpp:6 +template <typename T> +struct numeric_limit { + static T min() { return T(); } ---------------- numeric_limits (same elsewhere in this file). https://reviews.llvm.org/D33470 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits