================
Comment at: clang-tidy/google/GoogleTidyModule.cpp:35
@@ -33,1 +34,3 @@
     CheckFactories.addCheckFactory(
+        "google-runtime-member-string-references",
+        new ClangTidyCheckFactory<runtime::MemberStringReferencesCheck>());
----------------
Benjamin Kramer wrote:
> Daniel Jasper wrote:
> > Where does "runtime" come from? Does that make sense?
> We inherited the categories from cpplint.py and I've been following the 
> existing style. I think it makes sense to have a direct mapping from cpplint  
> categories to tidy checks.
Right. Having references to cpplint.py in some form is valueable, as we could 
then use the same check identifiers to support targeted NOLINT suppressions 
already present in the code.

The categories ("runtime", "readability", "build", "compatibility" etc.) used 
in cpplint.py make some sense: they usually reflect which aspects of the code 
quality the check addresses.

In this case "runtime" means that patterns detected by this check may lead to 
runtime errors (as opposed to just readability issues or compatibility 
problems).

================
Comment at: clang-tidy/google/MemberStringReferencesCheck.cpp:28
@@ +27,3 @@
+
+  // Ignore members in templates.
+  auto InTemplate = hasAncestor(
----------------
Did you mean "in template instantiations"? We don't (and shouldn't) ignore 
members in template declarations, if the type is not dependent on template 
arguments.

http://reviews.llvm.org/D4522



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to