sbenza added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13510#261925, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In http://reviews.llvm.org/D13510#261825, @Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > > > I think it'll be fine to rename check without leaving traces of misc. Same > > thing happened with modernize-shrink-to-fit. > > > I think the difference here is that many C++ Core Guideline checks are... > chatty, and so these checks are likely to not be enabled (especially on > existing code bases). By leaving the check in misc-*, it is more likely to > provide value to users that aren't able to use the cppcoreguidelines-* checks > yet. Now that we are registering checks with more than one name, it might be a good idea to add a dedup step to avoid redundant warnings and/or wasted resources. Not on this change but something to consider. http://reviews.llvm.org/D13510 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
