alexfh added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/DefinitionsInHeadersCheck.cpp:25
@@ +24,3 @@
+ SourceLocation ExpansionLoc = SM.getExpansionLoc(Node.getLocStart());
+ StringRef Filename = SM.getFilename(ExpansionLoc);
+ return Filename.endswith(".h") || Filename.endswith(".hh") ||
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> hokein wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > We're looking at the problem from different angles. My view is that a
> > > > reasonable file naming convention (which at least makes interface
> > > > header files, textual headers and main files distinguishable) is a
> > > > widespread enough practice, and the benefits it brings outweigh the
> > > > costs of enforcing it. However, the opposite point of view also has its
> > > > right to exist, so we need a solution that fits both ;)
> > > >> Perhaps another solution to this is use isInMainFile() ||
> > > >> usesHeaderFileExtension().
> > > >You probably meant !isInMainFile() || usesHeaderFileExtension(). I
> > > >guess, that will work for us. We could also make the list of header file
> > > >extensions (or a regular expression pattern for header files)
> > > >configurable, so that the usesHeaderFileExtension() part could be
> > > >disabled, if needed.
> > >
> > > Oops, you are correct, I meant !isInMainFile(). :-) I definitely agree
> > > that we should make the header file extensions configurable. Would it
> > > make sense if this were a global option that any checker can use? We have
> > > 3-4 other checkers that care about header files as well, and it would be
> > > nice if they all behaved consistently without the user having to write a
> > > lot of options for each checker.
> > I'm :+1 on making header file extensions configurable. I think we can do
> > that in a new patch.
> Having to configure this in a single place would be convenient. OTOH, I can
> imagine corner-cases, where a single option would be undesired. One thing we
> could do is to allow global options that can be overridden for each check.
> Something along the lines of (modulo tests):
>
> ```
> std::string OptionsView::get(StringRef LocalName, std::string Default)
> const {
> - const auto &Iter = CheckOptions.find(NamePrefix + LocalName.str());
> + auto Iter = CheckOptions.find(NamePrefix + LocalName.str());
> if (Iter != CheckOptions.end())
> return Iter->second;
> + // Fallback to global setting, if present.
> + Iter = CheckOptions.find(LocalName.str());
> + if (Iter != CheckOptions.end())
> + return Iter->second;
> return Default;
> }
> ```
>
> Alternatively, we could add another method (e.g. `getLocalOrGlobal`) to make
> the usage of the global setting explicit.
>
> What do you think?
This should read "Having a way to configure this in a single place ..."
http://reviews.llvm.org/D15710
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
