[PATCH] D11784: [PATCH] clang-tidy check for incorrect move constructor initializers

[Aaron Ballman via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D11784#220654, @aaron.ballman wrote:

> Ping?
>
> FWIW, this patch almost caught a bug in LLVM. ;-) DependenceAnalysis.h has a class: FullDependence which would suffer from this problem if the Dependence base class did not accidentally suppress creation of the move constructor by defaulting only the copy constructor. (Separate patch forthcoming.) I think that may be a reasonable option for this patch to test for, but wasn't quite certain. What do others think?


Do you think that this patch should have an option for the case where the initialization cannot use a move constructor because the default one is deleted?

~Aaron


http://reviews.llvm.org/D11784