[PATCH] D127446: [clang-tidy] Add `-verify-config` command line argument
Aaron Ballman via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Jun 22 04:05:59 PDT 2022
aaron.ballman added inline comments.
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/infrastructure/verify-config.cpp:12
+// CHECK-VERIFY-DAG: command-line option '-config': warning: Unknown Check 'readability-else-after-ret'; did you mean 'readability-else-after-return'
+// CHECK-VERIFY-DAG: command-line option '-config': warning: Unknown Check Option 'modernize-lop-convert.UseCxx20ReverseRanges'; did you mean 'modernize-loop-convert.UseCxx20ReverseRanges'
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > It's unfortunate that `warning: ` appears in the middle of the diagnostic as opposed to at the start. I wonder if this can be reworked to say: `warning: Unknown check 'whatever'; did you mean 'whatever'? [-verify-config]` or something?
> > Also, no test coverage for the error case and for the unknown check case where there's no closest match worth talking about.
> Warning appearing in the middle is kind of by design as when clang emits diagnostics, the source location is the first thing emitted, then the type(warning|error). In this case `command-line option '-config'` is the "source location"
> > Also, no test coverage for the error case.
> I'm not 100% on that, there is no checking when the check glob is actually built and I haven't figured out how to break it.
> then the type(warning|error). In this case command-line option '-config' is the "source location"
Ah, thanks for explaining your logic. FWIW, Clang uses a different style for that (`<command line>`): https://godbolt.org/z/f1rdsbjqe Perhaps we should follow suit? (In fact, we could use the diagnostic engine for this instead of emitting to the error stream ourselves?)
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
More information about the cfe-commits