JonasToth added a comment.

@aaron.ballman @lebedev.ri The check is getting really complex. I run it over 
LLVM and detected some warnings, where iam not sure if they are valid or not. 
Its already a somewhat usable state, but its hard to determine false positives 
and false negatives.

For me, that false positives are worse for now, because they annoy. Its easier 
to add false negatives especially with user feedback. My idea is now: Take a 
look at refactoring the code to introduce const as fixit and iterate the check 
until LLVM compiles after the check fixed all missing consts. What do you think 
about that strategy? And could you take a look at the todo list at the top of 
`ConstCheck.cpp`. Did I miss something?

  rCTE Clang Tools Extra

cfe-commits mailing list

Reply via email to