aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantDataCallCheck.cpp:31
+void RedundantDataCallCheck::registerMatchers(MatchFinder *Finder) {
+ using namespace ast_matchers;
+
----------------
No need to register any of these matchers unless in C++ mode.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantDataCallCheck.cpp:45
+ anyOf(TypesMatcher, pointerType(pointee(TypesMatcher)))))),
+ callee(namedDecl(hasName("data"))))
+ .bind("call")))),
----------------
Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > Should this check apply equally to `std::string::c_str()` as well as
> > `std::string::data()`?
> readability-redundant-string-cstr do both.
Yup! But that makes me wonder if the name "redundant-data-call" is an issue.
Perhaps the check name should focus more on the array subscript in the presence
of an operator[]()?
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D45702
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
