[PATCH] D15796: [PATCH] clang-tidy documentation redirects

[Alexander Kornienko via cfe-commits]

alexfh added inline comments.

================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/cert-dcl54-cpp.rst:5
@@ +4,2 @@
+.. meta::
+   :http-equiv=refresh: 0;URL=misc-new-delete-overloads.html
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> alexfh wrote:
> > alexfh wrote:
> > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > alexfh wrote:
> > > > > Since this is not a deprecated/obsolete file, it might be a good idea to also add a textual redirection with native RST links for media not supporting HTTP redirects (e.g. PDF or whatever else can be generated from the RST files).
> > > > So basically use a regular link instead of the meta redirect?
> > > I'd use either a regular link, or both a link and the redirect.
> > One interesting aspect to consider is the bingability of check names, e.g. http://www.bing.com/search?q=google-build-namespaces or http://www.google.com/search?q=misc-new-delete-overloads (apparently, this one doesn't work well with bing).
> > 
> > I'm not sure redirects will play well with it, but we can try. Inclusion of the checks in the index seems like the must though, if we want the checks to be searchable.
> I think a link and the redirect make sense. Would a 5 second delay be a reasonable amount of time before the auto redirect?
> 
> Also, the more I think on it, the more I agree that we want the checks in the index file. I think it might be best to make the aliases visually distinct, though. So perhaps something like:
> 
> cert-dcl54-cpp (alias to misc-new-delete-overloads)
> 
> And then have the link go directly to misc-new-delete-overloads instead of making them click through or wait for the redirect?
Let's try with links to aliases and a delayed redirect and then see how it works.

> I think it might be best to make the aliases visually distinct, though. So perhaps something like:
> 
> cert-dcl54-cpp (alias to misc-new-delete-overloads)

We need to teach add_new_check.py to retain (or automatically generate) these comments then.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D15796