[PATCH] D138491: [clangd] Add script to maintain list of fast clang-tidy checks
Kadir Cetinkaya via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Nov 23 02:24:01 PST 2022
kadircet accepted this revision.
kadircet added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/TidyFastChecks.inc:2
+// This file is generated, do not edit it directly!
+// This describes
+#ifndef FAST
----------------
can you also re-run the script before checking in (or update here, since re-running all might take a while, but would be a good way to test history preserving logic)
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/TidyFastChecks.py:76
+print(f"""// This file is generated, do not edit it directly!
+// Deltas are perncentage regression in parsing {args.file}
+#ifndef FAST
----------------
s/perncentage/percentage
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/TidyFastChecks.py:83
+ print(f"{decision} {check} {time}% <= {threshold}%", file=sys.stderr)
+ print(f"{decision}({check}, {time})")
+
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> kadircet wrote:
> > i don't see the point in including delta in the output if we're also making the decision here. is it mostly for debugging purposes? e.g. when updating the list we get to see the difference?
> Yes, that's exactly the reason. Can make it a comment instead if you like, but that makes ad-hoc analysis slightly harder.
if that's the case no need. just wanted to make sure about it.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D138491/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D138491
More information about the cfe-commits
mailing list