carlosgalvezp added a comment.
Do we want to keep the `experimental` word in the flag?
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/tool/ClangTidyMain.cpp:266
+static cl::opt<bool>
EnableModuleHeadersParsing("enable-module-headers-parsing",
+ desc(R"(
----------------
--experimental-enable-module-headers-parsing
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/tool/ClangTidyMain.cpp:270
+for C++20 and above, empowering specific checks
+to detect macro definitions within modules.
+)"),
----------------
Should we document the implications/risks of enabling this, so people are
informed? Also the fact that is experimental and subject to change.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:129
+ functionality using the newly added command line option
+ `--enable-module-headers-parsing`.
+
----------------
experimental
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D156161/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D156161
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
