aaron.ballman added a comment. In D67140#1659831 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140#1659831>, @NoQ wrote:
> In D67140#1659774 <https://reviews.llvm.org/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 its messaging. It's jarring that one > > part of the compiler emits diagnostics one way and another emits them a > > totally different way. It may be less of an impact for people who don't see > > the output from both at the same time, but that happens to be the use case > > I have. > > > Unfortunately i think at this point many clients who tried to integrate > multiple tools resorted to "Automatic Message Recapitalization" (c). For that > reason we probably can harmlessly decapitalize Static Analyzer messages. I > suspect that it won't really change anything either, because most tools will > still be afraid of accidental inconsistencies in the compiler. 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 correct. :-D Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D67140 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
