[PATCH] D33470: [clang-tidy] Add misc-default-numerics

[Piotr Padlewski via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

Prazek added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33470#790484, @aaron.ballman wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33470#789791, @Prazek wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33470#764846, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> >
> > > Once you fix the typo in the check, can you run it over some large C++ code bases to see if it finds any results?
> >
> >
> > I tried it on LLVM code base (after fixing bug with the numeric_limits name) and it didn't find anything suspisious.
> >  Unfortunatelly I don't have enough time to try it on different codebases, but I am weiling to fix any bug with this check if it would happen in the future.
> >  The release 5.0 is near, so I would like to push it upstream. Does it sound good to you?
>
>
> My concern is: does this find any actual issues in real world code? This seems like such a highly specific check -- not many people use numeric_limits in the first place, let alone on non-builtin types, so does it justify running this check when someone batch-includes all of the misc checks?
>
> I don't think this check is going to trigger a ton of false positives. I am wondering more the opposite: will this check ever trigger on anything other than compiler test cases?


The check is based on the real world scenario that my friend had at work, so at least I know about one such case :)
It probably won't be a very popular check in terms of fiding anything, but it should find real bugs. The matcher is very easy so the check should be fast.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D33470