aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp:50
+ CheckFactories.registerCheck<AvoidFunctionalCheck>(
+ "modernize-avoid-functional");
CheckFactories.registerCheck<DeprecatedHeadersCheck>(
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> 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?
That works for me -- I have a slight preference for
`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
