[PATCH] Adding documentation for clang-tidy.

[Manuel Klimek]

================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy.rst:5
@@ +4,3 @@
+
+:program:`clang-tidy` is a clang-based C++ linter tool. It's purpose is to find
+style errors precisely without false positives or false negatives and
----------------
Its

================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy.rst:6
@@ +5,3 @@
+:program:`clang-tidy` is a clang-based C++ linter tool. It's purpose is to find
+style errors precisely without false positives or false negatives and
+automatically fix them. :program:`clang-tidy` is modular and provides a
----------------
I don't think that finding style errors is the only purpose of clang-tidy.
I also don't think not having false positives or negatives is one of the core things about clang-tidy - on the contrary, I think clang-tidy is nice because we can do things that have less accuracy than we'd need for a clang warning.

Perhaps:
Its purpose is to provide an extensible framework for diagnosing and fixing typical programming errors, like style violations, interface misuse, or bugs that can be deduced via static analysis.


================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy.rst:26
@@ +25,3 @@
+``-checks=`` and ``-disable-checks=`` options. :program:`clang-tidy` selects the
+checks whith names matching the regular expression specified by the ``-checks=``
+option and not matching the one specified by the ``-disable-checks=`` option.
----------------
with

================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy.rst:36
@@ +35,3 @@
+
+* Checks related to the Google style have names starting with ``google-``.
+
----------------
I would cut out style. See above.

================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy.rst:110
@@ +109,3 @@
+The interface provided by clang-tidy makes it easy to write useful and precise
+checks in just a few lines of code. If you have an idea of a good check, the
+rest of this document explains how to do this.
----------------
idea for


http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2880