[cfe-dev] Removing the naming checks from clang's .clang-tidy files

[Jonas Toth via cfe-dev]

Yes, allowing different configuration files in clang-tidy would be an
easy step forward (clang-tidy requires a '.clang-tidy' file and provides
no option to specify something else).

See this revision https://reviews.llvm.org/D55523 for some thoughts we
have in the clang-tidy space on how to proceed and integrate with
phabricator.

Am 01.02.19 um 14:00 schrieb Ilya Biryukov:
> Totally agree, if we had a nice UI (in Phabricator?) or a script to
> show only clang-tidy warnings touching the change diffs, disabling
> these checks would have been a much harder sell.
> Even in that case, though, we'd probably want to have different
> configs for clang-tidy-over-diffs and clang-tidy to avoid cluttering
> the output when using clangd or standalone clang-tidy.
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 2:44 PM Jonas Toth <development at jonas-toth.eu
> <mailto:development at jonas-toth.eu>> wrote:
>
>     I think there could be two modes in which clang-tidy is being run.
>
>     For new code seeing these violations would be great, but they
>     could be run as linter in `arc`, for existing code this is of course
>     another thing.
>
>     In my opinion we should lint new code better and have clang-tidy
>     run there at least with full configuration enabled.
>
>     Am 01.02.19 um 12:21 schrieb Ilya Biryukov via cfe-dev:
>>     We disabled the two most noisy checks in r352862 and clang-tidy
>>     now produces only 3 warnings on Sema.h.
>>     Let us know if you have concerns and feel we should revert this.
>>
>>     On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 6:03 PM Ilya Biryukov
>>     <ibiryukov at google.com <mailto:ibiryukov at google.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi cfe-dev,
>>
>>         Clangd started showing clang-tidy warnings recently and I've
>>         noticed there is too much of by clang-tidy inside the clang
>>         codebase, and most of it is coming from
>>         'readability-identifier-naming' check (at least in the Sema
>>         and Parser code).
>>
>>         E.g. running 
>>         ./bin/clang-tidy  ../llvm/clang/lib/Parse/ParseExpr.cpp
>>
>>         produces produces 52 warnings, 51 of which are naming
>>         violations from 'readability-identifier-naming'. 'Sema.h' has
>>         1830 clang-tidy warnings with 'readability-identifier-naming'
>>         and 228 without it.
>>
>>         IIUC, the consensus is that renaming everything to align with
>>         the style guide is just not worth it (would introduce merge
>>         conflicts, mess up the history, etc). Does this render the
>>         naming check non-useful for the 'clang/' project? Should we
>>         remove it from  'clang/.clang-tidy'?
>>
>>         Are there other alternatives that could bring down the noise
>>         in clang-tidy output and actually make it useful (e.g. we
>>         could put a file-wide NOLINT comments into those files)?
>>
>>         -- 
>>         Regards,
>>         Ilya Biryukov
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Regards,
>>     Ilya Biryukov
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     cfe-dev mailing list
>>     cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
>>     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Ilya Biryukov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20190201/8abb9518/attachment.html>