yawanng updated this revision to Diff 100777.
yawanng added a comment.
Modify the detection algorithm. Add another two checks and corresponding tests
as well as the docs.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304
Files:
clang-tidy/CMakeLists.txt
clang-tidy/android/AndroidTidyModule.cpp
Eugene.Zelenko added a comment.
It's also necessary to mention new checks group in docs/clang-tidy/index.rst.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
yawanng added a comment.
I will make some major changes to this CL based on the current suggestions from
reviewers and update it for further review later. Thank you for the valuable
advice.
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304
alexfh requested changes to this revision.
alexfh added inline comments.
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
Comment at: clang-tidy/android/FileDescriptorCheck.cpp:25
+ callExpr(
+ callee(functionDecl(allOf(
+
yawanng added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758871, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758808, @alexfh wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758713, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758624, @srhines wrote:
> > >
aaron.ballman added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758808, @alexfh wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758713, @aaron.ballman wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758624, @srhines wrote:
> >
> > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758621, @joerg wrote:
> > >
>
Eugene.Zelenko added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tidy/android/AndroidTidyModule.cpp:15
+#include "../ClangTidyModuleRegistry.h"
+#include "../readability/BracesAroundStatementsCheck.h"
+#include "../readability/FunctionSizeCheck.h"
Are readability headers
alexfh added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758713, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758624, @srhines wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758621, @joerg wrote:
> >
> > > I find the use of "must" at the very least inappropriate. If there was no
aaron.ballman added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758624, @srhines wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33304#758621, @joerg wrote:
>
> > I find the use of "must" at the very least inappropriate. If there was no
> > use case for not including it, it wouldn't be an option. There