alexfh added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp:50
+ CheckFactories.registerCheck<AvoidFunctionalCheck>(
+ "modernize-avoid-functional");
CheckFactories.registerCheck<DeprecatedHeadersCheck>(
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> I'm not keen on this name -- it suggests the user should avoid functional,
> which is certainly not the advice we want to give them. Also, it makes no
> mention of deprecations, which is what the check is all about.
>
> How about: `modernize-functional-deprecations` and we can use
> `modernize-deprecations` as the eventual catch-all umbrella,
> `modernize-<header name>-deprecations` for other headers, and
> `modernize-<header name>-deprecations-<api>` if we want to add API-level
> granularity?
I'd suggest to put "deprecations" first: modernize-deprecations-functional. Or
maybe modernize-deprecated-functional?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D42730
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
