salman-javed-nz added a comment. In D118104#3292862 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D118104#3292862>, @JesApp wrote:
> Well, since this was more of source of confusion than actual incorrect > behaviour, I don't think there should be a test for it. > > In general though, I think the script is complex enough to warrant some > testing. That being said: I don't think they should be part of this patch. > Also, I'm doing this on company time and I don't think my boss would be to > happy if I wrote a testsuite from scratch when I just wanted to fix one bug. > :D I wasn't asking about creating a new test suite from scratch. I guess I wasn't clear. The idea I had was a file in `clang-tools-extra\test\clang-tidy\infrastructure` with something like this: // RUN: %run_clang_tidy -checks="-*,google-explicit-constructor,modernize-use-auto" %s | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-1 %s // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-1: Enabled checks: // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-1-NEXT: google-explicit-constructor // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-1-NEXT: modernize-use-auto // RUN: %run_clang_tidy -checks="-*,google-explicit-constructor,modernize-use-auto" -config "Checks: -modernize-use-auto" %s | FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-2 %s // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-2: Enabled checks: // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-2-NEXT: google-explicit-constructor // CHECK-ENABLED-CHECKS-2-NOT: modernize-use-auto Note: I haven't tested this. If it doesn't work, then it's probably a minor tweak away from working. This would confirm that the "Enabled checks:" message reflects the combined results of `-checks` and `-config` arguments. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D118104/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D118104 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
