compnerd added a comment. If the argument really is that we want to minimize the tools then Id argue that `clang-rename` also belongs in `clang-tidy` as it would be used to rename fields to match the naming convention (tidying up your code base).
`clang-tidy` could work, but it does seem to be introducing a completely new concept into `clang-tidy` AFAICT. It has so far only done equivalent changes. This operation doesn't guarantee equivalence: if you are doing a `reinterpret_cast` or a C-style cast, that will no longer work as the object layout has changed. We could merge both tools into `clang-tidy`, or perhaps we can hold off on that for the wider discussion, and allow this to make progress in the mean time. Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D23279 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
