[clang] [clang-tools-extra] [llvm] User-defined annotations for clang-tidy analysis POC (PR #195054)

[Valentyn Yukhymenko via llvm-commits]

BaLiKfromUA wrote:

@vbvictor thank you a lot for pointing out! IIRC this RFC was on my radar at some point but I missed follow up conversations.

I agree with reusing existing attribute since it would simplify our original goal to improve usage of `bugprone-unchecked-optional-access`.

Do we need an RFC then in this case or just putting PR with parts of existing content and revisited design is enough?

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/195054