[PATCH] D53974: [clang-tidy] new check: bugprone-too-small-loop-variable

Jonas Toth via Phabricator via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Sun Nov 11 11:11:34 PST 2018

JonasToth added a comment.

> Yes, that's right, these are not full false positives, but the check's main focus is on those loops which are runtime dependent. If a loop's upper bound can be calculated in compile time then this loop should be caught by a compiler warning based on the actual value of that constant. See -Wtautological-constant-out-of-range-compare for example. So I think it's the best if we can avoid catching these issues using a type based matching.
>  Anyway, there is not too many of this kind of false positives, so it's not a big issue. In LLVM code I did not find any similar case.
>  I can't see full false positives where the check works incorrectly. The detected type mismatch seems correctly detected in every case.

Agree. I think this check is good to go.

I would commit this check tomorrow if that is ok with you.

  rCTE Clang Tools Extra


More information about the cfe-commits mailing list