nkakuev added a comment. Thanks for the response, Alex!
The problem I tried to address in this patch was that notes in source files were "unsuppressing" warnings from third-party headers (this is what we were discussing in https://reviews.llvm.org/D26418#590417). But at this point, I no longer think that my patch is the right way to handle this situation. A general-purpose suppression list looks like a way better idea to me. As for delegating the suppression of warnings to an external tool, I'm not entirely sure that this is always a good idea. I run clang-tidy on incremental builds on developers machines and use //-warnings-as-errors=*//. In other words, I treat clang-tidy warnings the same way I treat compiler warnings (with //-Werror// enabled). A suppression list will let me keep this workflow while using an external tool is likely to break it. So what do you think about extending existing suppression mechanisms to support suppression lists? https://reviews.llvm.org/D26418 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
