search for: actual_type

...people are too eager to use `auto` because it is easy to write but it makes the types substantially harder for the reader to understand > > I'm probably the Nth person to ask this, but what keeps us from promoting the use of a clang-tidy-powered tool that basically emits fixits of s/auto/actual_type/? Because the tool would need to apply judgement to when this makes sense. If we can’t write an algorithm in coding standards.html to be prescriptive about when to use auto, then I don’t think we can automate this. -Chris

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:25 PM Chris Lattner via cfe-dev < cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Generally no IMO, because the cases that produce optional are not obvious. > Just to say, +1 from me too. > > > * Can we use auto in c++14 lambda arguments with llvm::find_if(C, > [](const auto& i) { ... }) for example? > > * We need to use auto for structured