On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 8:37 AM Benjamin Kramer <benny....@gmail.com> wrote:
> -Wmissing-prototype only warns for functions, I want to catch classes > too. Ah, fair enough. Yeah, a clang-tidy check for things in the global namespace that are in a main file rather than a header could be another pivot there. > Also functions in the global namespace with a prototype are still > badness in some coding styles. *nod* makes sense - especially in C++, where, as you say, you might want to bless the extern "C" function declarations only. > The limitation on definitions was to > cut down on false positives, the current version of the patch doesn't > have that limitation but I'm pondering on putting it back as there are > too many false positives. > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:34 PM, David Blaikie <dblai...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This seems to have a lot of overlap with -Wmissing-prototype, really - > what > > do you think of the overlap/distinction between the two? > > > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM Eugene Zelenko via cfe-commits > > <cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> > >> Eugene.Zelenko added a subscriber: Eugene.Zelenko. > >> Eugene.Zelenko added a comment. > >> > >> Please mention this check in docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (in alphabetical > >> order). > >> > >> > >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D23130 > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> cfe-commits mailing list > >> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org > >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
