njames93 marked 3 inline comments as done. njames93 added a subscriber: Charusso. njames93 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone-not-null-terminated-result.rst:60 - If copy to the destination array can overflow [1] and - ``AreSafeFunctionsAvailable`` is set to ``Yes``, ``y`` or non-zero and it is + ``AreSafeFunctionsAvailable`` is set to `true` and it is possible to obtain the capacity of the destination array then the new function ---------------- aaron.ballman wrote: > This edit loses information about also accepting `Yes` and `y` -- is that > intentional (or were those unsupported before)? > > FWIW, I'd be fine dropping support for alternate spellings of `true`. Having looked throughout the NotNullTerminatedResultCheck header/impl files, I can't find any reference to `AreSafeFunctionsAvailable`. I can only guess this is meant to say WantToUseSafeFunctions. If that is the case, `Yes` and `y` were never supported spellings. Should this be changed to use that option name instead? cc @Charusso FWIW I intend (in the near future) to extend boolean parsing for check options to: `y|Y|yes|Yes|YES|true|True|TRUE|on|On|ON` `n|N|no|No|NO|false|False|FALSE|off|Off|OFF`. Reason for this is we claim to use YAML for config format and according to its specification, this is what is accepted as a boolean value. Ref https://yaml.org/type/bool.html. Still need to keep the old integer method of specifying bools for backwards compatibility reasons. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D92652/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D92652 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
