Summary:
Motivation/Context: in the code review system integrating with clang-tidy,
clang-tidy doesn't provide a human-readable description of the fix. Usually
developers have to preview a code diff (before vs after apply the fix) to
understand what the fix does before applying a fix.
This patch proposes that each clang-tidy check provides a short and
actional fix description that can be shown in the UI, so that users can know
what the fix does without previewing diff.
This patch extends clang-tidy framework to support fix descriptions (will add implementations for
existing checks in the future). Fix descriptions and fixes are emitted via diagnostic::Note (rather than
attaching the main warning diagnostic).
Before this patch:
```
void MyCheck::check(...) {
...
diag(loc, "my check warning") << FixtItHint::CreateReplacement(...);
}
```
After:
```
void MyCheck::check(...) {
...
diag(loc, "my check warning"); // Emit a check warning
diag(loc, "fix description", DiagnosticIDs::Note) << FixtItHint::CreateReplacement(...); // Emit a diagnostic note and a fix
}
```
Reviewers: sammccall, alexfh
Reviewed By: alexfh
Subscribers: MyDeveloperDay, Eugene.Zelenko, aaron.ballman, JonasToth, xazax.hun, jdoerfert, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang-tools-extra, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59932
llvm-svn: 358576
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
* Fix a false postive when an using class is used in an explicit template instantiation.
* Fix a false postive when an using template class is used as template argument.
Reviewers: aaron.ballman
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25437
llvm-svn: 283879
function call expression.
Summary:
The check doesn't mark the template argument as used when the template
argument is a template.
Reviewers: djasper, alexfh
Subscribers: klimek, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D22803
llvm-svn: 277444
Summary: Make the check's behavior more correct when handling using-decls in multiple scopes.
Reviewers: alexfh
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20909
llvm-svn: 271632
Summary:
We should check whether a UsingDecl is defined in macros or in class
definition, not TargetDecls of the UsingDecl.
Reviewers: alexfh
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D20666
llvm-svn: 271199
