xazax.hun added a comment.

Let's also summarize what do we have now and what do we want.

> I also think this sounds good, though I'm not quite sure it can be done in 
> this patch. Anyway, we should definitely specify what we expect from 
> first-class citizen checks. Please correct & extend the list:
> 
> - can be enabled or disabled through a unique name

This is addressed by the current pathc.

> - can have config options

Do you know warnings that have config options? Does this make sense for this 
featre?

> - can have aliases

Does that make sense to be able to add aliases to warning aliases? I

> - inherits ClangTidyCheck

I think this is just technical and this does not really affect the users.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#878808, @alexfh wrote:

> 1. Make `clang-diagnostic-*` checks first-class citizens and take full 
> control of all diagnostics, i.e. disable all Clang diagnostics by default, 
> and enable the ones that correspond to the enabled clang-diagnostic checks.


I think this might be a good idea in general. @leanil could you address this 
point in this patch?

> 2. Make aliases first-class citizens (there was a proposal as well, but we 
> didn't arrive to a consensus at that time). That would include the ability to 
> configure an alias name for any check including clang-diagnostic- and 
> clang-analyzer- checks.

I am not sure that this makes sense, see my points above.

> 3. Use aliases to map clang-diagnostic- checks to check names under cert-, 
> hicpp-, etc.

I agree.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to