[llvm-dev] merge_guards_bot reports clang-tidy/clang-format findings unrelated to modified code
Doerfert, Johannes via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jan 3 08:36:25 PST 2020
I second Fangrui's findings and add:
- clang-format should only run on "source" files. For one, it runs on
non-C/C++ files right now with the results you can imagine. Even if it
is a C/C++ test we do not always want to format it.
- it would be perfect if the linter would not report issues that are
present in the surrounding code, e.g., if the naming scheme is kept
consistent with the surrounding code it should not report it as
problematic. For example, since the functions in ADT/SetOperations.h
are all flagged as problematic which means if you add one in the same
style it is flagged as well.
On 01/02, Fangrui Song via llvm-dev wrote:
> First, I love this bot:) It makes LLVM's "pushing to master" practise less awful:)
> Now the main topic...
> > clang-tidy: fail. Please fix clang-tidy findings.
> For example, on https://reviews.llvm.org/D72103#1801916 ,
> merge_guards_bot reports clang-tidy findings of existing code, not just
> the modified code.
> I think https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks should use
> --line-filter= as clang-tidy/tool/clang-tidy-diff.py does.
> > clang-format: fail. Please format your changes with clang-format by running git-clang-format HEAD^ or applying this patch.
> Similarly, clang-format should use --lines to filter out untouched code.
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Argonne National Laboratory
Lemont, IL 60439, USA
jdoerfert at anl.gov
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the llvm-dev