aaron.ballman added a comment. In D142123#4066564 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D142123#4066564>, @KyleFromKitware wrote:
> In terms of a "generic check", there is already the `HeaderGuardCheck`, but > that has to be extended to be specific to the project's naming convention. > And I don't think there can be a generic check that converts `#pragma once` > to a header guard - when it adds the header guard, what does it name it? It > has to know the project's naming convention. It doesn't have to -- for example, we can name the guard based on the path to the header. e.g., `foo/include/bar/baz.h` could use `FOO_INCLUDE_BAR_BAZ_H` as the header guard. > If we want a check that replaces `#pragma once` with a header guard, our best > bet would be modifying `HeaderGuardCheck` to do this, since it already does > most of the needed work. However, such functionality is orthogonal to my > proposal here. It's orthogonal except for the design concerns. Basically, I don't think we should have one check for "go to header guards" and another check for "go to pragma once" -- IMO we should have one check to do either approach. @njames93 is correct that a common use case for clang-tidy is "enable all checks" so having two checks that do opposite things gets awkward in practice. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D142123/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D142123 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
