lebedev.ri added a comment. Thank you for looking into it!
In D114317#3149693 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114317#3149693>, @carlosgalvezp wrote: > In D114317#3149504 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114317#3149504>, > @salman-javed-nz wrote: > >> What would you say are the key differences between this patch differ and >> previous attempts, e.g. https://reviews.llvm.org/D72566? How does this patch >> address the concerns raised in the previous reviews? > > The key differences are: > > - It has been previously discussed and agreed upon via RFC in the mailing > list, as requested as a comment in the previous patch. > > - Check developers do not need to manually specify which check is aliasing > which check. It's automated and transparent, thus less burden on check > developers and less possibility for errors. > - Only aliases with the same configuration (perfect aliases) are removed. The > patch you mention would run only one instance with it's configuration, so > "aliases with different configuration" would incorrectly not be run (if I > read the commit message correctly). The leftover caveat of this approach is that it does not help the checks with configuration options, because it is likely that the options were tuned, but most likely only for a single check. I still maintain that there should be a single opt-in option to completely disable all aliasee checks. > I don't have a strong opinion as to which patch to use to continue this work, > I just would like to work on making it happen. It's been a standing issue for > quite a long time :) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D114317/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D114317 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
