[Release notes] Mention Clang-tidy misc-fold-init-type check.

Highlighting consistency in Clang-tidy misc-fold-init-type check documentation.

llvm-svn: 267576
This commit is contained in:
Eugene Zelenko 2016-04-26 17:54:00 +00:00
parent 380ebd0b2c
commit ca943b3929
2 changed files with 10 additions and 4 deletions

View File

@ -92,6 +92,12 @@ identified. The improvements since the 3.8 release include:
Detects dangling references in value handlers like
``std::experimental::string_view``.
- New `misc-fold-init-type
<http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/misc-fold-init-type.html>`_ check
The check flags type mismatches in `folds` like ``std::accumulate`` that might
result in loss of precision.
- New `misc-forward-declaration-namespace
<http://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/misc-forward-declaration-namespace.html>`_ check

View File

@ -5,13 +5,13 @@ misc-fold-init-type
The check flags type mismatches in
`folds <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fold_(higher-order_function)>`_
like `std::accumulate` that might result in loss of precision.
`std::accumulate` folds an input range into an initial value using the type of
the latter, with `operator+` by default. This can cause loss of precision
like ``std::accumulate`` that might result in loss of precision.
``std::accumulate`` folds an input range into an initial value using the type of
the latter, with ``operator+`` by default. This can cause loss of precision
through:
- Truncation: The following code uses a floating point range and an int
initial value, so trucation wil happen at every application of `operator+`
initial value, so trucation wil happen at every application of ``operator+``
and the result will be `0`, which might not be what the user expected.
.. code:: c++