[llvm-dev] clang-tidy makes review a pain

[David Blaikie via llvm-dev]

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:39 PM Stephen Kelly via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On 19/04/2021 20:32, David Blaikie via llvm-dev wrote:
> > eh, I think that's probably the wrong direction for LLVM, actually - I
> > think we've generally encouraged "const" being explicit when it's
> > otherwise wrapped up in "auto" - same as for *.
>
> Neither make sense to be to be honest. I'd very much like to see
> clang-tidy in reviews not complain about it. The '*' is quite easy to
> miss and
>
>      const auto *j1 = getPointer();
>      const auto j2 = getPointer();
>
> mean very different things.

They do, which to me I think means it's valuable/important to include
both const and * to clarify which thing is intended. It's valuable to
know that something is a pointer - cheap to copy, non-owning (not a
unique_ptr, don't have to use std::move on it), etc. It doesn't mean
every type that is cheap to copy and non-owning is documented in this
way - but does help for some types without making the type name
significantly longer/making expressions more unwieldy, etc.

(I'm surprised there wasn't much more discussion around it (perhaps
there was on an llvm-dev thread or the like) when this rule first went
in: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/fc9031cdffa3063ef747bd3a98833f164d07fc4a#diff-38d8333325264c104bb94d32db2248c0384fd39d7dbd8512fb4bb4939e3cf2a4
or

> The latter is also easier to port to a smart
> (or dumb) pointer.

I think it's more important that the code is a bit easier to read than
easier to modify in this way.

- Dave

>
> Thanks,
>
> Stephen.
>
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:12 AM Nathan James via llvm-dev
> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     For the record the warning about turning `auto *X` into `const auto *X`
> >     shouldn't be emitted, The check was adapted so that warning should no
> >     longer be emitted in llvm code.
> >     https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8a68c40a1bf256523993ee97b39f79001eaade91
> >     <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/8a68c40a1bf256523993ee97b39f79001eaade91>
> >
> >     I can only guess that the pre-merge build bot is using an old build of
> >     clang-tidy as that commit should be in the 11.0.0 release.
> >
> >     ~Nathan James
> >
> >     On Mon, 2021-04-19 at 09:43 +0000, Maxim Kazantsev via llvm-dev wrote:
> >      > Hello everyone,
> >      >
> >      > I started noticing that lately we’ve improved reporting from clang-
> >      > tidy, pointing out at various formatting issues. However the more
> >      > verbose it becomes, the more annoyed I feel about it. For example
> >      > here:
> >      >
> >      > https://reviews.llvm.org/D100721 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D100721>
> >      >
> >      > It complains literally about every second line, inserting its
> >      > comments straight into review. They take as much space as the actual
> >      > code. Maybe it’s just me, but it’s really hard to me to understand
> >      > what the patch is actually doing with so many inlined auto-generated
> >      > comments. Maybe there is a button to hide them somewhere, but I
> >      > failed to find it.
> >      >
> >      > I understand what was the intention, and clang-tidy is a cool thing
> >      > in general, but it’s getting too intrusive. Does anyone else have the
> >      > same problem as I do? If there’s a lot of people whom it annoys,
> >      > maybe we should think how to make it less invasive. Maybe it should
> >      > put these comment when the patch gets approved, or something like
> >      > this.
> >      >
> >      > Thanks,
> >      > Max
> >      >
> >      > _______________________________________________
> >      > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >      > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> >      > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >     <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
> >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     LLVM Developers mailing list
> >     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> >     https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >     <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev