[PATCH] D83224: [clangd] Move clang-tidy check modifications into ClangdServer

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/ClangdServer.cpp:115
+// either due to crashes or false positives.
+const char *getClangTidyBlacklist() {
+  static const std::string FalsePositives =
----------------
kadircet wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > njames93 wrote:
> > > Return by StringRef?
> > How about `getDisabledClangTidyChecks()` (or literally any other name than blacklist)?
> thanks for bringing this to my attention, i will try to be more conscious next time.
> 
> I would prefer allow/deny as `disabled` might also be offensive in some contexts. Do you know if we already have some settlements around this one in the wider community?
> thanks for bringing this to my attention, i will try to be more conscious next time.

No worries!

> I would prefer allow/deny as disabled might also be offensive in some contexts. Do you know if we already have some settlements around this one in the wider community?

I don't believe there's any consensus around avoiding use of "disabled" (we use the term in a lot of places, especially when paired with "enabled"), but I'd also be fine with allow/deny terminology instead.

As a minor drive-by comment, the function should also be marked `static` and placed outside of the anonymous namespace (per our usual coding style).


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D83224/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D83224