alexfh added a comment. LG.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D26453#592934, @flx wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D26453#590720, @malcolm.parsons wrote: > > > Add ValuesOnly option to modernize-pass-by-value. > > > Thanks for doing this. Alex, would this work for us? Yep, I think so. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/trunk/test/clang-tidy/misc-move-constructor-init.cpp:1 -// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-move-constructor-init %t -- -- -std=c++11 -isystem %S/Inputs/Headers +// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s misc-move-constructor-init,modernize-pass-by-value %t -- \ +// RUN: -config='{CheckOptions: \ ---------------- Test for one check running a different check is somewhat confusing. If we need to ensure that the patterns the two checks target don't overlap, maybe we should rename the test (<check1>+<check2>.cpp or something like that)? Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D26453 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
