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

+ // 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 cppcheck-opensource/cppcheck#7807

chrchr-github · 2025-09-24T13:01:02Z

 }

- 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 cppcheck-opensource/cppcheck#4785 to simplecpp first.

chrchr-github · 2025-09-24T13:04:02Z

 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


 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

 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

 {
 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

 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

 }
 }

+ // 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 9e8e7f2Compare March 17, 2025 11:51

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch 2 times, most recently from db52506 to 7babd3fCompare June 11, 2025 11:10

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 7babd3f to ea3e62cCompare 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 cppcheck-opensource/cppcheck#7807
Merged

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 9362069 to 092f92fCompare 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 63cdcfbCompare 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 95088dcCompare September 10, 2025 12:46

chrchr-github reviewed Sep 24, 2025
View reviewed changes

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from 95088dc to f595d1eCompare September 24, 2025 17:35

firewave commented Sep 27, 2025
View reviewed changes

firewave force-pushed the clang-21 branch from f595d1e to 28b4009Compare 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 9af1b83Compare September 29, 2025 00:26

firewave merged commit d86671f into cppcheck-opensource:masterSep 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));

Uh oh!

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-githubSep 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-githubSep 24, 2025•
edited
Loading