On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 8:57 AM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Ah, forgot one more thing: clang-tidy suggests to add -header-filter='.*' >> in some cases. This needs to be updated as well. > > > Here: clang-tidy/tool/ClangTidyMain.cpp:192
That appears to be the only instance of it in the source or the docs. ~Aaron > >> >> >> -- Alex >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 6:56 AM, Alexander Kornienko <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > Manuel, thanks for the correction. Omitting quotes would be a problem >>> > with >>> > `-checks *`, not `-checks=*` (which is used in the docs). >>> > >>> > Aaron, this patch looks almost good then. Note that the description of >>> > command-line arguments is just a dump of `clang-tidy -help`, so you >>> > need to >>> > fix the documentation in the code and then paste `clang-tidy -help` >>> > output >>> > to the .rst file and indent it appropriately. >>> >>> Thank you for pointing that out, I've corrected in this patch. >>> >>> > Could you also check whether the -config=... examples work on windows? >>> >>> They do work, from my simple tests. >>> >>> ~Aaron >>> >>> > It might also be useful to add a section describing the >>> > windows-specific >>> > aspects of clang-tidy usage some time in the future. >>> > >>> > -- Alex >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> I think that something starts with -check= on the disk is low >>> >> probability >>> >> enough that we don't lose much by not escaping it for unix users, >>> >> while >>> >> gaining a lot less confusion on windows. >>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 5:39 PM Alexander Kornienko >>> >> <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> I think, we need to leave the examples valid for unix-like shells and >>> >>> add >>> >>> a short section describing differences of shells or giving >>> >>> windows-specific >>> >>> usage instructions. Some examples are just impossible to make >>> >>> compatible >>> >>> with all shells (e.g. -checks='*', even though this is not >>> >>> particularly >>> >>> useful). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Aaron Ballman >>> >>> <[email protected]> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> >>> >>>> wrote: >>> >>>> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 2:34 PM Aaron Ballman >>> >>>> > <[email protected]> >>> >>>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Manuel Klimek >>> >>>> >> <[email protected]> >>> >>> >>>> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >> > Seems like we need different instructions for different shells >>> >>>> >> > then >>> >>>> >> > :( >>> >>>> >> > The problem is that otherwise the -*... can be subject to shell >>> >>>> >> > expansion if >>> >>>> >> > it happens to match some files. >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> Ah, I kind of wondered if this was a shell issue. Thank you for >>> >>>> >> the >>> >>>> >> verification! >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> Do you think it makes sense to update the option parsing code to >>> >>>> >> strip >>> >>>> >> the single quotes if they are present? >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > No, I don't think it's the tool's job to handle idiosyncrasies of >>> >>>> > the >>> >>>> > various shells. >>> >>>> > For the docs I see two possibilities: >>> >>>> > a) have 2 versions, one for cmd.exe, one for *sh. >>> >>>> > b) the probability that users will actually have file named >>> >>>> > -something, is >>> >>>> > not that high, we use the non-quoted version >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I kind of lean towards (b) with the understanding (which may be >>> >>>> incorrect) that users of the shell are expected to understand when >>> >>>> to >>> >>>> quote arguments and when not to. That being said, I don't have a >>> >>>> strong opinion on it. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> ~Aaron >>> >>>> >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Alex, thoughts? >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> ~Aaron >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> >> > >>> >>>> >> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM Aaron Ballman >>> >>>> >> > <[email protected]> >>> >>>> >> > wrote: >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> This patch addresses two issues (I can split the patch if it >>> >>>> >> >> is >>> >>>> >> >> desired): >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> 1) The docs have some non-ASCII characters in them that aren't >>> >>>> >> >> really >>> >>>> >> >> required. >>> >>>> >> >> 2) The docs suggest setting the checks using single quotes, >>> >>>> >> >> which >>> >>>> >> >> does >>> >>>> >> >> not work (at least, on Windows). >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> When you specify checks like -checks='-*,misc-some-check', the >>> >>>> >> >> single >>> >>>> >> >> quotes are not stripped by the option parser. When converting >>> >>>> >> >> the >>> >>>> >> >> flags into globs to pass along to regex, the single quotes >>> >>>> >> >> remain >>> >>>> >> >> as >>> >>>> >> >> part of the regular expression, and do not match >>> >>>> >> >> appropriately. >>> >>>> >> >> When >>> >>>> >> >> the single quotes are left off, the globs are correctly >>> >>>> >> >> generated. >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> ~Aaron >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >
clang-tidy v3.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
