Szelethus added a comment. I swear this is my last objection :) As soon as this is settled, I'll accept.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:483-504 + if (!AnOpts.RawSilencedCheckersAndPackages.empty()) { + std::vector<StringRef> Checkers = + AnOpts.getRegisteredCheckers(/*IncludeExperimental=*/true); + std::vector<StringRef> Packages = + AnOpts.getRegisteredPackages(/*IncludeExperimental=*/true); + + SmallVector<StringRef, 16> CheckersAndPackages; ---------------- Szelethus wrote: > The reason why I suggested validating this in CheckerRegistry is that > CheckerRegistry is the only class knowing the actual list of checkers and > packages, and is able to emit diagnostics before the analysis starts. This > solution wouldn't work with plugin checkers/packages. I don't see this being addressed actually? I think it would be totally fine to just omit the validation part as I said earlier, the patch will be leaner, and cases in which we're using the silencing of checkers are very exotic anyways. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D66042/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D66042 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits