[PATCH] D67545: [clang-tidy] Added DefaultOperatorNewCheck.

[Gabor Marton via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

martong added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/cert/DefaultOperatorNewCheck.cpp:51
+  // The alignment used by default 'operator new' (in bits).
+  const unsigned DefaultAlignment = Context.getTargetInfo().getNewAlign();
+
----------------
martong wrote:
> What is the difference between "default" and "fundamental" alignment? Are they the same? Can they differ in any architecture?
> 
> https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/cplusplus/MEM57-CPP.+Avoid+using+default+operator+new+for+over-aligned+types
> Here there is no wording of "default alignment" only "fundamental alignment" is mentioned. Based on this I'd call this as `FundamentalAligment`.
> What is the difference between "default" and "fundamental" alignment? Are they the same?

`fundamental alignment` of any type is the alignment of std::max_align_t. I.e. `alignof(std::max_align_t)`. 
See C++17 6.11.2.

On the other hand, default alignment is the value in `__STDCPP_DEFAULT_NEW_ALIGNMENT__` which may be predefined with `fnew-alignment`
See https://www.bfilipek.com/2019/08/newnew-align.html

These values can differ: https://wandbox.org/permlink/yIwjiNMw9KyXEQan

Thus, I think we should use the fundamental alignment here, not the default alignment. 
So, `getNewAlign()` does not seem right to me.
@aaron.ballman What do you think?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D67545/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D67545