[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus added a comment. Yes, thank you! I've been keeping my mailbox open and commiting slowly, it seems like the buildbots have a wrong email address set up for me. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ added a subscriber: timshen. NoQ added a comment. rL371773 - thanks @timshen! Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140 ___

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL371760: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as checks (authored by Szelethus, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ added a comment. In D67140#1664406 , @gribozavr wrote: > %select In D67140#1664921 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > `%select{}` Whoa, this could actually work then. I like it. Repository: rG LLVM Github

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1664406 , @gribozavr wrote: > In D67140#1664106 , @NoQ wrote: > > > In D67140#1659982 , @gribozavr > > wrote: > > > > > We should

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. In D67140#1664106 , @NoQ wrote: > In D67140#1659982 , @gribozavr wrote: > > > We should take a page from desktop software here. If the messages were in a > > separate file, there would

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ added a comment. In D67140#1659982 , @gribozavr wrote: > We should take a page from desktop software here. If the messages were in a > separate file, there would be a lot of people capable of mass-editing them. > When messages are hardcoded in the

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1659978 , @Szelethus wrote: > In D67140#1659907 , @NoQ wrote: > > > In D67140#1659872 , @aaron.ballman > > wrote: > > > > > If

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. We should take a page from desktop software here. If the messages were in a separate file, there would be a lot of people capable of mass-editing them. When messages are hardcoded in the tool code, navigating and editing them requires more skill, and definitely a lot

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus added a comment. In D67140#1659907 , @NoQ wrote: > In D67140#1659872 , @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > If we're okay with the inconsistency but still feel like giving ourselves > > more work, adding

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ added a comment. In D67140#1659872 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > If we're okay with the inconsistency but still feel like giving ourselves > more work, adding proper punctuation to Static Analyzer diagnostics would at > least make them grammatically

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus added a comment. I don't have strong feelings on capitalization itself either, but the idea of longer, multi-sentence bug report messages (maybe this could finally be used? D66572#inline-602143 ) sound pretty cool. Repository: rG

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1659831 , @NoQ wrote: > In D67140#1659774 , @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > I don't think it's a requirement (so long as the diagnostics are clear > > about the issue being

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ added a comment. In D67140#1659774 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > I don't think it's a requirement (so long as the diagnostics are clear about > the issue being diagnosed, I'm happy enough), but I think it's good for a > tool to be self-consistent in

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1659749 , @gribozavr wrote: > In D67140#1659356 , @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > In D67140#1658969 , @gribozavr > > wrote: > > > >

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. In D67140#1658365 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > In D67140#1658353 , @gribozavr wrote: > > > In D67140#1658315 , @aaron.ballman > > wrote: > > > > >

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. In D67140#1659356 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > In D67140#1658969 , @gribozavr wrote: > > > In D67140#1658365 , @aaron.ballman > > wrote: > > > > >

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus added a comment. In D67140#1658365 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > Then again, with the recent resurfacing of discussions about renaming > everything under the sun, maybe we've changed our community opinion here. :-D > I guess I don't see Check

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1658969 , @gribozavr wrote: > In D67140#1658365 , @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > Ah, good to know! That reduces my concern, but doesn't negate it. AFAIK, we > > haven't

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. In D67140#1658365 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > Ah, good to know! That reduces my concern, but doesn't negate it. AFAIK, we > haven't changed the interface such that it requires code changes rather than > just a recompile in

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1658353 , @gribozavr wrote: > In D67140#1658315 , @aaron.ballman > wrote: > > > In D67140#1656831 , @NoQ wrote: > > > > > Honestly,

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr added a comment. In D67140#1658315 , @aaron.ballman wrote: > In D67140#1656831 , @NoQ wrote: > > > Honestly, i'm much more worried about message capitalization :) > > > Likewise. I wish the static

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1656831 , @NoQ wrote: > Honestly, i'm much more worried about message capitalization :) Likewise. I wish the static analyzer would follow the usual conventions followed by clang and clang-tidy. ;-) In

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

alexfh added a reviewer: aaron.ballman. alexfh added a comment. In D67140#1656858 , @gribozavr wrote: > Thanks! Yay consistency. > > I prefer the term "checker" to refer to individual modules because I feel it > is more precise and less ambiguous. In

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

gribozavr accepted this revision. gribozavr added a comment. Thanks! Yay consistency. I prefer the term "checker" to refer to individual modules because I feel it is more precise and less ambiguous. In phrases like "malloc check", "make_unique check", it is unclear what does the check --

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

NoQ accepted this revision. NoQ added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Yay thanks!! In my understanding "check" is a feature of the tool, while "checker" is an entity within the tool that implements that feature. In most cases there's no difference, though, so yeah,

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus added reviewers: gribozavr, alexfh. Szelethus added subscribers: gribozavr, alexfh. Szelethus added a comment. @gribozavr, @alexfh this isn't a particularly exciting patch, but it does highlight a fundamental difference in between the analyzer and clang-tidy, so I added you for the

[PATCH] D67140: [analyzer][NFC] Fix inconsistent references to checkers as "checks"

Szelethus created this revision. Szelethus added reviewers: NoQ, xazax.hun, Charusso, baloghadamsoftware, rnkovacs, dcoughlin. Szelethus added a project: clang. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, gamesh411, dkrupp, donat.nagy, mikhail.ramalho, a.sidorin, szepet, whisperity. Traditionally,