[cfe-dev] [clang-tidy] Dealing with check names

[Gábor Horváth via cfe-dev]

2016. dec. 12. du. 5:24 ezt írta ("Piotr Padlewski" <
piotr.padlewski at gmail.com>):

This sounds also good. I was thinking that it would be nice if clang-tidy
itself could warn about old name and dump config, but problem here is
when user have configuration "misc-*" and we moved one check from misc to
other group. We should probably dump clang-tidy version in the config to
know how old is config.


That is a hairy problem. The reason why I do not like too many aliases,
because it makes it harder to introduce clang tidy to a project. One have
to go through more checkers. Also more work to set up the configuration
files and check for inconsistencies (e.g.: same checker turned on using
multiple names and inconsistent configuration options).


2016-12-12 16:17 GMT+01:00 Gábor Horváth <xazax.hun at gmail.com>:

> Hi!
>
> What about an alternative solution, like changing the names and providing
> a python script to migrate the configuration files?
>
> Regards,
> Gábor
>
> On 12 December 2016 at 16:02, Piotr Padlewski via cfe-dev <
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> as clang-tidy grows there are more and more checks. One of the problem I
>> see is that "misc" check group is not user friendly - there are many checks
>> that do so many different things that usually user don't want to enable
>> whole group.
>> Other groups like modernize, performance, google, cert, boost, llvm
>> doesn't have this problem. Naturally the solution would be to split the
>> group into smaller groups that would mean more.
>> The problem is that we should not change names because old configs will
>> not work.
>>
>> Do you have some ideas how we could fix it, so we could make it easier
>> for users to use it?
>>
>> Other feature that we could add if we would know how to solve it is that
>> we could make new groups that would mostly have aliases to other checks.
>> This might be specially useful for cert checks - the cert code names
>> doesn't tell anything, so it would be good to have these checks with proper
>> name in different group so normal user could see what this check is doing
>> from name and CERT users could run checks with cert group as it was before.
>>
>>
>> One solution that I see is to reserve old name and make redirection, and
>> maybe output warning about deprecated name when user would use special flag
>> (e.g. verbose)
>>
>> What do you think about this problem?
>>
>> Piotr
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20161212/a0ef2a9e/attachment.html>