[PATCH] Refactor: Move remove-cstr-calls from a standalone executable to a clang-tidy check

[Alexander Kornienko]

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D7318#133243, @LegalizeAdulthood wrote:

> Run clang-format on the source files.
>  Use the name `readability-redundant-cstr-call` for the check.


Thanks for updating this. However could you use one of the alternatives I suggested? If you lean toward using 'call' in the name, let it be `readability-redundant-cstr-calls` and correspondingly `RedundantCStrCallsCheck` for the name of the class and the source files. Something seems wrong to me in using singular `call` in the name of this check, as it's supposed to find any number of them, not just one. Also note the `Check` suffix for the class name (and corresponding file names. It's kind of a naming convention for the checks.

Thanks.

For the reference, here's my previous comment:

> The fact that it removes something doesn't make it much different from other checks, and it doesn't deserve a place in the name. Let's call this check "readability-redundant-cstr" or "readability-redundant-cstr-calls" instead (and the class RedundantCStrCheck or RedundantCStrCallsCheck).



http://reviews.llvm.org/D7318

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/