[PATCH] D38171: [clang-tidy] Implement clang-tidy check aliases

[Alexander Kornienko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

alexfh added a comment.

In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#925929, @xazax.hun wrote:

> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#909346, @leanil wrote:
>
> > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171#901427, @xazax.hun wrote:
> >
> > > One problem to think about when we add all clang-diagnostic as "first or second" class citizen, `checkes=*` might now enable all the warnings which make no sense and might be surprising to the users. What do you think?
> >
> >
> > This is a good point. Should I insert ",-clang-diagnostic*" after any (positive) * ?
>
>
> @alexfh do you have some thoughts on this?


I don't think this particular point is a large concern. As I mentioned multiple times, enabling all checks is almost never useful due to many checks overlapping or producing conflicting advice. The only place I can think of, where -checks=* is useful is in combination with -list-checks, where the presence of clang-diagnostic- entries would be desired anyway.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D38171