[PATCH] D111041: [clang-tidy] Remove 'IgnoreDestructors = true' from cppcoreguidelines-explicit-virtual-functions

[Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D111041#3059245 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D111041#3059245>, @carlosgalvezp wrote:

>> Eh, I personally don't care all that much one way or the other (so sure, I can do that!), but I recall there being a push to keep the "title" line under something very small (50 chars?) because of the way tools sometimes display this information to users, so I've always stripped the bit within [] to ensure we keep a sufficiently short title.
>
> Yeah I understand, it makes sense. I just find that in general that's not respected so I wonder if people choose consistency in using [] over short commit messages. I can also find this in the Docs:
>
>> When the changes are restricted to a specific part of the code (e.g. a back-end or optimization pass), it is customary to add a tag to the beginning of the line in square brackets. For example, “[SCEV] …” or “[OpenMP] …”. This helps email filters and searches for post-commit reviews.
>
> Anyhow, minor detail :)

Yeah, we're pretty inconsistent about this because it depends on the committer and what process they use to land commits. I commit manually (I don't use arc), so I can leave the tags in easily enough.

>> That said, I'm wondering if you're planning to stick around in the clang-tidy community? If so, given that you've got a few good patches accepted already, it might be time to consider getting you commit privileges of your own. https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#obtaining-commit-access has more details on what that entails.
>
> That'd be great, thanks for the support! Since I'm mostly working on this on my spare time I can't promise much involvement, but rather occasional bug fixes and minor improvements. Still would be good to lift the commit burden from you haha. I really enjoy the repro structure, build system and processes, it's a very nice codebase to work with. If time allows I could potentially look into larger pieces of work, like adding new clang-tidy modules (e.g. Misra/Autosar checks). I find some local forks here and there that have done it but never pushed upstream, which I find a bit sad.

It's totally up to you if you'd like to request commit access or not (I'll happily support your request), but it's not a burden for me to commit things. I just have to be around to babysit the bots in case a fix or revert is needed, basically. My recommendation is: if you think you'll do patches here and there as time allows, you might as well request commit access; if you think your contributions are likely to not continue in the future, then no reason to do that dance.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D111041/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D111041