clang-tidy.yml: updated to Clang 21 by firewave · Pull Request #421 · danmar/simplecpp

firewave · 2025-03-17T11:43:32Z

No description provided.

firewave · 2025-08-05T16:05:31Z

/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/14/../../../../include/c++/14/bits/stl_pair.h:295:17: error: an exception may be thrown in function 'pair' which should not throw exceptions [bugprone-exception-escape,-warnings-as-errors]
  295 |       constexpr pair(pair&&) = default;         ///< Move constructor
      |                 ^
/home/runner/work/simplecpp/simplecpp/simplecpp.cpp:1754:29: note: frame #0: unhandled exception of type 'simplecpp::Macro::Error' may be thrown in function 'parseDefine' here
 1754 |                             throw Error(tok->location, "In definition of '" + nameTokDef->str() + "': Missing opening parenthesis for __VA_OPT__");
      |                             ^
/home/runner/work/simplecpp/simplecpp/simplecpp.cpp:1515:21: note: frame #1: function 'operator=' calls function 'parseDefine' here
 1515 |                     parseDefine(other.nameTokDef);
      |                     ^
/home/runner/work/simplecpp/simplecpp/simplecpp.cpp:1502:19: note: frame #2: function 'Macro' calls function 'operator=' here
 1502 |             *this = other;
      |                   ^
/usr/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/14/../../../../include/c++/14/bits/stl_pair.h:295:17: note: frame #3: function 'pair' calls function 'Macro' here
  295 |       constexpr pair(pair&&) = default;         ///< Move constructor
      |                 ^

@glankk this was introduced in 8f8bfe3 - please have a look

glankk · 2025-08-14T10:52:40Z

@glankk this was introduced in 8f8bfe3 - please have a look

The root cause of this issue seems to be that Macro doesn't have a move constructor, so its copy constructor is used instead in the std::pair move constructor. The default move constructor in Macro is deleted because it has a reference as a member (which I think is generally a bad idea).

I think the cleanest solution to this is to replace the references with pointers and implement sane move operators. I'll work out a draft. @danmar please chime in if you have an opinion on this.

glankk · 2025-08-14T15:15:33Z

Related: #493

firewave · 2025-09-08T08:41:51Z

I filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14119 about detecting one of the misc-const-correctness cases ourselves.

firewave · 2025-09-09T10:28:07Z

I worked around the bugprone-exception-escape warning for now and filed #537.

firewave · 2025-09-09T18:03:02Z

simplecpp.h

+            // NOLINTNEXTLINE(misc-const-correctness) - FP
            FileData *const newdata = new FileData(std::move(data));


I filed llvm/llvm-project#157730 about this.

chrchr-github · 2025-09-23T18:26:29Z

Can this be merged? It is blocking danmar/cppcheck#7807

chrchr-github · 2025-09-24T13:01:02Z

simplecpp.cpp

            }

-            Token * const output_end_1 = output.back();
+            const Token * const output_end_1 = output.back();


This is not semantically const. Maybe a NOLINT would be more appropriate.

Indeed.

Maybe I should apply danmar/cppcheck#4785 to simplecpp first.

chrchr-github · 2025-09-24T13:04:02Z

simplecpp.cpp

            const bool unexpectedA = (!A->name && !A->number && !A->str().empty() && !canBeConcatenatedWithEqual && !canBeConcatenatedStringOrChar);

-            Token * const B = tok->next->next;
+            const Token * const B = tok->next->next;


~~Same, B's members are modified below.~~
Looks like there still is a cppcheck FN here.

That's possible. I did not check all remaining cases yet.

There's several false negatives.

This is the same as https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14161.

chrchr-github · 2025-09-26T07:44:47Z

Ping @danmar

firewave · 2025-09-27T08:17:27Z

simplecpp.cpp


        std::string type;
-        for (simplecpp::Token *typeToken = tok1; typeToken != tok2; typeToken = typeToken->next) {
+        for (const simplecpp::Token *typeToken = tok1; typeToken != tok2; typeToken = typeToken->next) {


False negative tracked as https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14119.

firewave · 2025-09-27T08:24:38Z

simplecpp.cpp

        if (tok->str() != "sizeof")
            continue;
-        simplecpp::Token *tok1 = tok->next;
+        const simplecpp::Token *tok1 = tok->next;


I filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/14161 about this.

firewave · 2025-09-27T08:45:39Z

simplecpp.cpp

 {
    bool gotoTok1 = false;
-    for (Token *tok = *tok1; tok && tok->op != ')'; tok =  gotoTok1 ? *tok1 : tok->next) {
+    for (const Token *tok = *tok1; tok && tok->op != ')'; tok =  gotoTok1 ? *tok1 : tok->next) {


This is also only technically correct.

firewave · 2025-09-27T08:50:34Z

I validated the misc-const-correctness changes with #548 and the suppressions removed.

danmar

I just have spelling to complain about

danmar · 2025-09-27T23:14:23Z

simplecpp.cpp

 void simplecpp::TokenList::constFoldQuestionOp(Token **tok1)
 {
    bool gotoTok1 = false;
+    // NOLINTNEXTLINE(misc-const-correctness) - technically correct but used to access non-cost data


"non-cost" => "non-const"

danmar · 2025-09-27T23:15:08Z

simplecpp.cpp

                }
            }

+            // NOLINTNEXTLINE(misc-const-correctness) - technically correct but used to access non-cost data


spelling: "non-cost"

chrchr-github · 2025-09-29T07:00:28Z

Are there any plans for a new simplecpp version?

firewave · 2025-09-29T08:17:18Z

Are there any plans for a new simplecpp version?

From my side after #475 was merged.

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 8283561 to 9e8e7f2 Compare March 17, 2025 11:51

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch 2 times, most recently from db52506 to 7babd3f Compare June 11, 2025 11:10

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 7babd3f to ea3e62c Compare August 4, 2025 20:44

glankk mentioned this pull request Aug 14, 2025

Replace reference members with pointers #493

Open

firewave mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2025

Fix #14119 FN constVariablePointer for variable declared in for loop / partial fix for #14148 danmar/cppcheck#7807

Merged

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 9362069 to 092f92f Compare September 9, 2025 10:18

firewave mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2025

address bugprone-exception-escape clang-tidy warning in Macro copy constructor #537

Open

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 495a113 to 63cdcfb Compare September 9, 2025 10:28

firewave marked this pull request as ready for review September 9, 2025 10:29

firewave commented Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 63cdcfb to 95088dc Compare September 10, 2025 12:46

chrchr-github reviewed Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 95088dc to f595d1e Compare September 24, 2025 17:35

firewave commented Sep 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from f595d1e to 28b4009 Compare September 27, 2025 08:46

danmar approved these changes Sep 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

firewave added 2 commits September 29, 2025 02:25

clang-tidy.yml: updated to Clang 21

64df78a

mitigated misc-const-correctness clang-tidy warnings

e982bd8

firewave added 6 commits September 29, 2025 02:26

disabled -Wnrvo Clang warning

36b4c0c

split up Clang warnings in CMake

446663d

.clang-tidy: disabled readability-use-concise-preprocessor-directives

197fb48

fixed readability-math-missing-parentheses clang-tidy warnings

a43105f

mitigated misc-const-correctness clang-tidy false positive

0e31c6a

avoid bugprone-exception-escape in Macro copy constructor

9af1b83

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 28b4009 to 9af1b83 Compare September 29, 2025 00:26

firewave merged commit d86671f into danmar:master Sep 29, 2025
16 checks passed

firewave deleted the clang-21 branch September 29, 2025 00:35

		// NOLINTNEXTLINE(misc-const-correctness) - FP
		FileData *const newdata = new FileData(std::move(data));

Conversation

firewave commented Mar 17, 2025

Uh oh!

firewave commented Aug 5, 2025

Uh oh!

glankk commented Aug 14, 2025

Uh oh!

glankk commented Aug 14, 2025

Uh oh!

firewave commented Sep 8, 2025

Uh oh!

firewave commented Sep 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chrchr-github commented Sep 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chrchr-github Sep 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chrchr-github commented Sep 26, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

firewave commented Sep 27, 2025

Uh oh!

danmar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chrchr-github commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

firewave commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

firewave commented Sep 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

chrchr-github Sep 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading