This is similar to the LLVM_TABLEGEN, CLANG_TABLEGEN and
CLANG_PSEUDO_GEN cmake cache variables.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129799
Rename it to clang-tidy-confusable-chars-gen, to make its role
clearer in a wider context.
In cross builds, the caller might want to provide this tool
externally (to avoid needing to rebuild it in the cross build).
In such a case, having the tool properly namespaced makes its role
clearer.
This matches how the clang-pseudo-gen tool was renamed in
a43fef05d4 / D126725.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D129798
This patch connects the check for const-correctness with the new general
utility to add `const` to variables.
The code-transformation is only done, if the detected variable for const-ness
is not part of a group-declaration.
The check allows to control multiple facets of adding `const`, e.g. if pointers themself should be
marked as `const` if they are not changed.
Reviewed By: njames93
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54943
This reverts commit b94db7ed7e.
See comments on https://reviews.llvm.org/D112916:
- breaks `check-clangd`, and makes clang-tidy crash on simple inputs
- likely does the wrong thing in cross builds
Also revert follow-up "[gn build] (manually) port b94db7ed7e (Confusables.inc)"
This reverts commit 180bae08a0.
Detect when an identifier contains some Right-To-Left characters.
This pass relates to https://trojansource.codes/
Example of misleading source:
short int א = (short int)0;
short int ג = (short int)12345;
int main() {
int א = ג; // a local variable, set to zero?
printf("ג is %d\n", ג);
printf("א is %d\n", א);
}
This is a recommit of 299aa4dfa1 with missing
option registration fixed.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112914
This reverts commit 7f92a1a84b.
It triggers an assert, see http://45.33.8.238/linux/60293/step_9.txt
"AST/Decl.h:277: llvm::StringRef clang::NamedDecl::getName() const: Assertion `Name.isIdentifier() && "Name is not a simple identifier"' failed."
Fix various tool libraries not to link to clang's .a libraries and dylib
simultaneously. This may cause breakage, in particular through
duplicate command-line option declarations.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81967
This reverts commit 97aa593a83 as it
causes problems (PR45453) https://reviews.llvm.org/D77574#1966321.
This additionally adds an explicit reference to FrontendOpenMP to
clang-tidy where ASTMatchers is used.
This is hopefully just a temporary solution. The dependence on
`FrontendOpenMP` from `ASTMatchers` should be handled by CMake
implicitly, not us explicitly.
Reviewed By: aheejin
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77666
Summary:
Recursion is a powerful tool, but like any tool
without care it can be dangerous. For example,
if the recursion is unbounded, you will
eventually run out of stack and crash.
You can of course track the recursion depth
but if it is hardcoded, there can always be some
other environment when that depth is too large,
so said magic number would need to be env-dependent.
But then your program's behavior is suddenly more env-dependent.
Also, recursion, while it does not outright stop optimization,
recursive calls are less great than normal calls,
for example they hinder inlining.
Recursion is banned in some coding guidelines:
* SEI CERT DCL56-CPP. Avoid cycles during initialization of static objects
* JPL 2.4 Do not use direct or indirect recursion.
* I'd say it is frowned upon in LLVM, although not banned
And is plain unsupported in some cases:
* OpenCL 1.2, 6.9 Restrictions: i. Recursion is not supported.
So there's clearly a lot of reasons why one might want to
avoid recursion, and replace it with worklist handling.
It would be great to have a enforcement for it though.
This implements such a check.
Here we detect both direct and indirect recursive calls,
although since clang-tidy (unlike clang static analyzer)
is CTU-unaware, if the recursion transcends a single standalone TU,
we will naturally not find it :/
The algorithm is pretty straight-forward:
1. Build call-graph for the entire TU.
For that, the existing `clang::CallGraph` is re-used,
although it had to be modified to also track the location of the call.
2. Then, the hard problem: how do we detect recursion?
Since we have a graph, let's just do the sane thing,
and look for Strongly Connected Function Declarations - widely known as `SCC`.
For that LLVM provides `llvm::scc_iterator`,
which is internally an Tarjan's DFS algorithm, and is used throught LLVM,
so this should be as performant as possible.
3. Now that we've got SCC's, we discard those that don't contain loops.
Note that there may be more than one loop in SCC!
4. For each loopy SCC, we call out each function, and print a single example
call graph that shows recursion -- it didn't seem worthwhile enumerating
every possible loop in SCC, although i suppose it could be implemented.
* To come up with that call graph cycle example, we start at first SCC node,
see which callee of the node is within SCC (and is thus known to be in cycle),
and recurse into it until we hit the callee that is already in call stack.
Reviewers: JonasToth, aaron.ballman, ffrankies, Eugene.Zelenko, erichkeane, NoQ
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: Charusso, Naghasan, bader, riccibruno, mgorny, Anastasia, xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Tags: #llvm, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72362
Add a clang-tidy check for using func__/FUNCTION__ inside lambdas. This
evaluates to the string operator(), which is almost never useful and almost
certainly not what the author intended.
Patch by Bryce Liu!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33497
llvm-svn: 304570
I have a created a new check for clang tidy: misc-string-compare. This will check for incorrect usage of std::string::compare when used to check equality or inequality of string instead of the string equality or inequality operators.
Example:
```
std::string str1, str2;
if (str1.compare(str2)) {
}
```
Reviewers: hokein, aaron.ballman, alexfh, malcolm.parsons
Subscribers: xazax.hun, Eugene.Zelenko, cfe-commits, malcolm.parsons, Prazek, mgorny, JDevlieghere
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D27210
llvm-svn: 290747
The checker detects various cases when an enum is probably misused
(as a bitmask).
Patch by: Peter Szecsi!
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22507
llvm-svn: 290600
Summary:
This is needed for the recently submitted misc-use-after-move check (rL281453).
For some reason, this still built under Linux, but it caused the PPC build bot
to fail.
Subscribers: beanz, cfe-commits, mgorny
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24561
llvm-svn: 281460
Summary:
The check warns if an object is used after it has been moved, without an
intervening reinitialization.
See user-facing documentation for details.
Reviewers: sbenza, Prazek, alexfh
Subscribers: beanz, mgorny, shadeware, omtcyfz, Eugene.Zelenko, Prazek, fowles, ioeric, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D23353
llvm-svn: 281453
Summary:
The check emits a warning if std::move() is applied to a forwarding reference, i.e. an rvalue reference of a function template argument type.
If a developer is unaware of the special rules for template argument deduction on forwarding references, it will seem reasonable to apply std::move() to the forwarding reference, in the same way that this would be done for a "normal" rvalue reference.
This has a consequence that is usually unwanted and possibly surprising: If the function that takes the forwarding reference as its parameter is called with an lvalue, that lvalue will be moved from (and hence placed into an indeterminate state) even though no std::move() was applied to the lvalue at the callsite.
As a fix, the check will suggest replacing the std::move() with a std::forward().
This patch requires D23004 to be submitted before it.
Reviewers: sbenza, aaron.ballman
Subscribers: klimek, etienneb, alexfh, aaron.ballman, Prazek, Eugene.Zelenko, mgehre, cfe-commits
Projects: #clang-tools-extra
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22220
llvm-svn: 280077
Summary:
The new API for fixit is in libtooling and the library misc in clang-tidy
didn't had the appropriate dependency.
This commit was breaking some build bots:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D19547
This commit tried (but failed) to fix it:
http://reviews.llvm.org/D20180
To repro, you can make a build with these flags:
```
cmake -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
```
Thanks rnk@ for helping figuring out.
Reviewers: alexfh, rnk
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20182
llvm-svn: 269240
Summary: Finds return statements in assign operator bodies where the return value is different from '*this'. Only assignment operators with correct return value Class& are checked.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, alexfh, sbenza
Subscribers: o.gyorgy, baloghadamsoftware, LegalizeAdulthood, aaron.ballman, Eugene.Zelenko, xazax.hun, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18265
llvm-svn: 268492
Summary:
This checker finds redundant expression on both side of a binary operator.
The current implementation provide a function to check whether expressions
are equivalent. This implementation is able to recognize the common
subset encounter in C++ program. Side-effects like "x++" are not considered
to be equivalent.
There are many False Positives related to macros and to floating point
computations (detecting NaN). The checker is ignoring these cases.
Example:
```
if( !dst || dst->depth != desired_depth ||
dst->nChannels != desired_num_channels ||
dst_size.width != src_size.width ||
dst_size.height != dst_size.height ) <<--- bug
{
```
Reviewers: alexfh
Subscribers: danielmarjamaki, fahlgren, jordan_rose, zaks.anna, Eugene.Zelenko, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19451
llvm-svn: 267574
Summary:
For folds (e.g. std::accumulate), check matches between the provided init value and the range's value_type. A typical error is "std::accumulate(begin, end, 0);", where begin and end have float value_type. See the documentation for more examples.
For now we check std::accumulate, std::reduce and std::inner_product.
Reviewers: hokein, alexfh
Subscribers: Prazek, aaron.ballman, cfe-commits, courbet
Patch by Clément Courbet!
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D18442
llvm-svn: 267542
Summary:
Checker to validate string constructor parameters.
A common mistake is to swap parameter for the fill-constructor.
```
std::string str('x', 4);
std::string str('4', x);
```
Reviewers: alexfh
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D19146
llvm-svn: 267011
Martin Storsjö