carlosgalvezp added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines/noexcept-special-functions.rst:10 +`performance-noexcept-special-functions <../performance/noexcept-special-functions.html>`_ +for more information. ---------------- PiotrZSL wrote: > Add link to implemented cpp core guidelines rules. > Add reference > C.66: Make move operations noexcept > C.83: For value-like types, consider providing a noexcept swap function. > Same goes to operator == (C.86 rule) > And hash C.89 rule > Since there are different rules for different functions it's probably easier to maintain if we have 1 check per rule. Having a large check doing multiple things and multiple reasons for change can lead to more bugs, churn, renames, etc. What do you think? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148697/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D148697 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
