[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

alexfh added inline comments. Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-suspicious-semicolon-fail.cpp:5 -// RUN: clang-tidy %s -checks="-*,misc-suspicious-semicolon,clang-diagnostic*" \ -// RUN:-- -DWERROR -Wno-everything -Werror=unused-variable 2>&1 \ // RUN: | FileCheck %s -chec

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#1036893, @alexfh wrote: > I'm totally fine taking full control of clang-diagnostic- "checks", i.e. > automatically adding corresponding -W flags and removing all other -W flags > (or prepending -Wno-everything). > > However, could we sp

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

alexfh added a comment. I apologize for completely ignoring this for a long time. I'm totally fine taking full control of clang-diagnostic- "checks", i.e. automatically adding corresponding -W flags and removing all other -W flags (or prepending -Wno-everything). However, could we split the al

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

lebedev.ri added a comment. While i don't have a leg to stand on here, i'd be *much* more comfortable if this would be a proper RFC mail in cfe-dev, that would explore all the possible options (this, and the one from cfe-dev thread clang-tidy and CppCoreGuidelines

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

xazax.hun added subscribers: dkrupp, whisperity. xazax.hun added a comment. @alexfh did you have any chance to think about this change? https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

leanil marked 2 inline comments as done. leanil added a comment. Does anyone have any more thoughts about this? https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cf

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

leanil updated this revision to Diff 127736. leanil added a comment. Remove redundant empty lines. Make list-clang-diagnostics test less strict. Update getAllDiagnostics to use std::vector. https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171 Files: clang-tidy/ClangTidy.cpp clang-tidy/ClangTidyDiagnosticConsume

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

xazax.hun added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/ClangTidyDiagnosticConsumer.cpp:262 +std::vector ClangTidyContext::getEnabledClangDiagnostics() { + llvm::SmallVector Diags; + DiagnosticIDs::getAllDiagnostics(diag::Flavor::WarningOrError, Diags); I am wo

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

xazax.hun added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#927046, @alexfh wrote: > And, btw, sorry for the long delay. I've been on travelling / on vacation for > the last few weeks. No problem. Will you have some time to think about the overall concept? Implementation and test wise it lo

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

malcolm.parsons added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#927045, @alexfh wrote: > The only place I can think of, where -checks=* is useful is in combination > with -list-checks, where the presence of clang-diagnostic- entries would be > desired anyway. Can we replace -list-checks w

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

alexfh added a comment. And, btw, sorry for the long delay. I've been on travelling / on vacation for the last few weeks. https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#925929, @xazax.hun wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#909346, @leanil wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#901427, @xazax.hun wrote: > > > > > One problem to think about when we add all clang-diagnostic as "first or >

[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

xazax.hun added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#909346, @leanil wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#901427, @xazax.hun wrote: > > > One problem to think about when we add all clang-diagnostic as "first or > > second" class citizen, `checkes=*` might now enable all the warni