aaron.ballman added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13313#257506, @alexfh wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13313#257476, @aaron.ballman wrote: > > > As a slightly more broad question: I think we should have a > > user-customizable way to categorize these checks so that you can > > enable/disable them with finer-grained control. Some of the existing > > checkers already cover the Cpp guidelines, and we'll likely be adding > > plenty more. There's quite likely overlap with Google and LLVM checkers, > > etc. It would be really nice if we had a way to say: -checks=-*, > > CppGuidelines or -checks=-*, CERT, etc. > > > > (I'm not suggesting this as part of this patch, but I think it is an idea > > we should consider exploring because style guidelines abound: the new C++ > > ones, MISRA, CERT, joint strike fighter, etc. User-customizable > > categorization would really help for this sort of thing. This would help > > assuage my issue with the checker being on by default in misc-* -- it could > > be off in misc-* but on in cppcoreguidelines-*, for instance.) > > > > ~Aaron > > > One way we could get CppCoreGuidelines checks available for easy enabling as > a whole is to create a separate module and register all relevant checks there > with names relevant to the CppCoreGuidelines (e.g. register the > `clang::tidy::google::ExplicitConstructorCheck` there as > "cppcoreguidelines-rc-explicit"). If a checks needs to be slightly modified > in order to be closer to a specific rule, we might add some check options and > configure proper defaults in the > `CppCoreGuidelinesModule::getModuleOptions()`. If a larger change in behavior > is needed, we could inherit from existing checks as well. That's a good idea that I hadn't considered before. I may give this a shot for the CERT checks as well. Thank you for the suggestion! ~Aaron http://reviews.llvm.org/D13313 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
