These weren't tracked and so weren't updated when applying fixes.
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/misc-unused-parameters.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
157–159 | I think this fix is incorrect and should not be applied; it changes the meaning of the interface from having a converting constructor to having a default constructor. I think that needs to be optional behavior because it's a pretty invasive change to apply automatically. This patch builds on top of the existing incorrect behavior, but would be fine if it was only applied when the option to modify constructors is enabled. |
Thanks @aaron.ballman for the review!
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/misc-unused-parameters.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
157–159 | I'm not against an option, but I'd like to get to a default behavior that is "safe". So I guess my first patch should be to undo the transformation happening here in the test already. Then we also can't do it for a Ctor with two parameters as it'll turn it into a converting ctor. Unless you can eliminate both parameters, in which case it is become a default ctor (which can conflict with an existing one, in which case it can be just deleted?) |
clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/misc-unused-parameters.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
157–159 |
Definitely agreed!
I think that's a good approach.
Initially, I'd say let's not touch any C++ constructors. We may be able to find conservative logic for it, but that'll take time to get right. |
I think this fix is incorrect and should not be applied; it changes the meaning of the interface from having a converting constructor to having a default constructor. I think that needs to be optional behavior because it's a pretty invasive change to apply automatically. This patch builds on top of the existing incorrect behavior, but would be fine if it was only applied when the option to modify constructors is enabled.