aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52334#1250166, @steveire wrote:
> > I think a reasonable place would be docs/clang-tidy/index.rst in the > > "Getting Involved" area. > > Thanks, that's at least actionable, but not very specific. I've added docs > now. If they don't say what you want them to say, then please be specific > about what you want them to say. There's no reason to have 5 more rounds of > review here if being specific means only one more round is needed. It's a reasonable, if terse, start to documenting how to build clang-tidy. Mostly some mechanical changes to format the new docs the same as the other docs in the file. > Are you going to 'accept' this patch eventually, or will I still be waiting > for @alexfh once you're happy with it? Once I'm happy, I will accept it. If @alexfh has further comments, then they can be addressed at that time (pre or post commit). ================ Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/index.rst:340-341 +If CMake is configured with `CLANG_ENABLE_STATIC_ANALYZER`, clang tidy will +not have the `static-analyzer` checks or the `mpi` checks. + ---------------- Double backticks around `CLANG_ENABLE_STATIC_ANALYZER` Change "clang tidy" into :program:`clang-tidy` (with single backticks around clang-tidy) Change `static-analyzer` into `clang-analyzer-*` with double backticks Change `mpi` into `mpi-*` with double backticks will not have -> will not be built with support for Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D52334 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
