aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46159#1086553, @pfultz2 wrote:
> > I think the premise is a bit off the mark. It's not that these are not for > > the common user -- it's that they're simply not ready for users at all. > > Then why was it merged into clang in the first place? It seems like the whole > point of merging it into clang is to get user feedback. When something is merged into Clang trunk, the expectation is that it will be production quality or will be worked on rapidly to get it to production quality, which is somewhat orthogonal to getting user feedback. I don't know that I have the full history of all of the alpha checks so my generalization may be inaccurate, but it seems like some of these checks were accepted as a WIP and the "progress" stopped for a long time with no one volunteering to remove the features from the analyzer. > Furthermore, I am trying to update the conversion checker to report more > errors, and I would like it to be exposed to users so I can find or fix the > FPs. That does not require clang-tidy to surface the alpha checks, correct? https://reviews.llvm.org/D46159 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
