I imagine that there will be:
a) common checks with a "common-" prefix
b) Checks that can share the implementation, but that are configured with
specific options and then registered via a specific name. E.g., there could be
a google-include-order and an llvm-include-order. They could use the same
implementation but they would be configured with different parameters.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/select-checks.cpp:2
@@ +1,3 @@
+// RUN: grep -Ev "// *[A-Z-]+:" %s > %t.cpp
+// RUN: clang-tidy %t.cpp -fix -checks=llvm.* --
+// RUN: FileCheck -input-file=%t.cpp %s
----------------
Sean Silva wrote:
> Why is this `llvm.` when the check names are `llvm-`? Seems confusing.
This is a regular expression.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/llvm/LLVMModule.cpp:88
@@ +87,3 @@
+ StringRef SourceFile = Sources.getFilename(HashLoc);
+ if (!SourceFile.endswith(".cc"))
+ return;
----------------
Sean Silva wrote:
> Shouldn't this be checking LangOptions instead of the extension? e.g. this
> wouldn't work for LLVM's `.cpp` naming.
This is a dummy implementation. Any real order-check will be totally different.
http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D884
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
