There's many instances in clang tidy checks where owning strings are used when we already have a stable string from the options, so using a StringRef makes much more sense.
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124341
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith, #libc, ldionne
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
This implements the following changes:
* AutoType retains sugared deduced-as-type.
* Template argument deduction machinery analyses the sugared type all the way
down. It would previously lose the sugar on first recursion.
* Undeduced AutoType will be properly canonicalized, including the constraint
template arguments.
* Remove the decltype node created from the decltype(auto) deduction.
As a result, we start seeing sugared types in a lot more test cases,
including some which showed very unfriendly `type-parameter-*-*` types.
Signed-off-by: Matheus Izvekov <mizvekov@gmail.com>
Reviewed By: rsmith
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110216
Run clang-tidy on all source files under `clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy`
with `-header-filter=clang-tidy.*` and make suggested corrections.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112864
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Removed the uses of the allOf() matcher inside node matchers that are implicit
allOf(). Replaced uses of allOf() with the explicit node matcher where it makes
matchers more readable. Replace anyOf(hasName(), hasName(), ...) with the more
efficient and readable hasAnyName().
llvm-svn: 347520
Summary:
This patch introduces support for legacy C-style resource functions that must obey
the 'owner<>' semantics.
- added legacy creators like malloc,fopen,...
- added legacy consumers like free,fclose,...
This helps codes that mostly benefit from owner:
Legacy, C-Style code that isn't feasable to port directly to RAII but needs a step in between
to identify actual resource management and just using the resources.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman, alexfh, hokein
Reviewed By: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: nemanjai, JDevlieghere, xazax.hun, kbarton
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38396
llvm-svn: 316092
This patch introduces a note for variable declaration that are later deleted.
Adds FIXME notes for possible automatic type-rewriting positions as well.
Reviewed by aaron.ballman
Differential: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38411
llvm-svn: 314913
This check implements the typebased semantic of `gsl::owner`.
Meaning, that
- only `gsl::owner` is allowed to get `delete`d
- `new` expression must be assigned to `gsl::owner`
- function calls that expect `gsl::owner` as argument, must get either an owner
or a newly created and recognized resource (in the moment only `new`ed memory)
- assignment to `gsl::owner` must be either a resource or another owner
- functions returning an `gsl::owner` are considered as factories, and their result
must be assigned to an `gsl::owner`
- classes that have an `gsl::owner`-member must declare a non-default destructor
There are some problems that occur when typededuction is in place.
For example `auto Var = function_that_returns_owner();` the type of `Var` will not be
an `gsl::owner`. This case is catched, and explicitly noted.
But cases like fully templated functions
```
template <typename T>
void f(T t) { delete t; }
// ...
f(gsl::owner<int*>(new int(42)));
```
Will created false positive (the deletion is problematic), since the type deduction
removes the wrapping `typeAlias`.
Codereview in D36354
llvm-svn: 313067
This check implements the typebased semantic of `gsl::owner`.
Meaning, that
- only `gsl::owner` is allowed to get `delete`d
- `new` expression must be assigned to `gsl::owner`
- function calls that expect `gsl::owner` as argument, must get either an owner
or a newly created and recognized resource (in the moment only `new`ed memory)
- assignment to `gsl::owner` must be either a resource or another owner
- functions returning an `gsl::owner` are considered as factories, and their result
must be assigned to an `gsl::owner`
- classes that have an `gsl::owner`-member must declare a non-default destructor
There are some problems that occur when typededuction is in place.
For example `auto Var = function_that_returns_owner();` the type of `Var` will not be
an `gsl::owner`. This case is catched, and explicitly noted.
But cases like fully templated functions
```
template <typename T>
void f(T t) { delete t; }
// ...
f(gsl::owner<int*>(new int(42)));
```
Will created false positive (the deletion is problematic), since the type deduction
removes the wrapping `typeAlias`.
Please give your comments :)
llvm-svn: 313043
Nathan James