On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Daniel Jasper <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am fine with leaving those out until it causes a problem. On the other > hand, adding them seems cheap. Up to you. > I wouldn't add .clang-tidy files to the test/ directories, as they would make the wrong impression of actually being useful. Also, "Checks: '-*'" is not a good way to disable analysis. Currently will make clang-tidy output an error and the help message, as running clang-tidy with no checks is not what usually people want to do. We could add a "DontAnalyze" or similar configuration option to make it possible to explicitly disable clang-tidy for certain paths. Any other concerns or is it good to submit? > > > On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> The tests are not included in the compilation database, so clang-tidy >> won't run on them. But I could add .clang-tidy files to the test/ >> directories, if you like. >> On 8 Sep 2014 09:08, "Chandler Carruth" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Daniel Jasper <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Do we really need a separate file for Clang? Shouldn't D5236 suffice as >>>> Clang is always checked out into LLVM? >>>> >>> >>> There are folks that still develop without Clang checked out under LLVM. >>> Seems cheap to support that here. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On the other hand, I would add files containing "Checks: '-*'" into the >>>> test/ directories of both. Mosts test won't be (and don't need to be) >>>> clang-tidy clean. >>>> >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>>
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
