[PATCH] D15710: [clang-tidy] Add non-inline function definition and variable definition check in header files.

[Haojian Wu via cfe-commits]

hokein marked an inline comment as done.

================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/DefinitionsInHeadersCheck.cpp:25
@@ +24,3 @@
+  SourceLocation ExpansionLoc = SM.getExpansionLoc(Node.getLocStart());
+  StringRef Filename = SM.getFilename(ExpansionLoc);
+  return Filename.endswith(".h") || Filename.endswith(".hh") ||
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> > We're looking at the problem from different angles. My view is that a reasonable file naming convention (which at least makes interface header files, textual headers and main files distinguishable) is a widespread enough practice, and the benefits it brings outweigh the costs of enforcing it. However, the opposite point of view also has its right to exist, so we need a solution that fits both ;)
> >> Perhaps another solution to this is use isInMainFile() || usesHeaderFileExtension().
> >You probably meant !isInMainFile() || usesHeaderFileExtension(). I guess, that will work for us. We could also make the list of header file extensions (or a regular expression pattern for header files) configurable, so that the usesHeaderFileExtension() part could be disabled, if needed.
> 
> Oops, you are correct, I meant !isInMainFile(). :-) I definitely agree that we should make the header file extensions configurable. Would it make sense if this were a global option that any checker can use? We have 3-4 other checkers that care about header files as well, and it would be nice if they all behaved consistently without the user having to write a lot of options for each checker.
I'm :+1 on making header file extensions configurable. I think we can do that in a new patch.


http://reviews.llvm.org/D15710