JonasToth added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-misplaced-const.c:18 + // CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE-1]]:12: warning: 'i3' declared with a const-qualified typedef type; results in the type being 'int *const' instead of 'const int *' + // CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE-14]]:14: note: typedef declared here ---------------- alexfh wrote: > JonasToth wrote: > > alexfh wrote: > > > These notes are also just marginally useful and make it harder to change > > > the test. I wonder whether an absolute line number would make more sense > > > here. Or maybe just add a test for one of the notes and leave out the > > > rest (and keep CHECK-MESSAGES)? > > Absolute line number makes sense. IMHO the tests should cover all generated > > diagnostics including the notes. Would you accept sticking with > > `CHECK-NOTES` but with absolute line numbers? > > IMHO the tests should cover all generated diagnostics including the notes. > > I wouldn't call this the most important goal. I'd say that tests should cover > important aspects of the output, not every single character of it. Another > useful feature is that tests should be easy to create, read, and change. In > cases like this - where the benefit of the change is not obvious - I would > leave the decision to the author of the check. > > Aaron, WDYT? @aaron.ballman not sure if you overlooked that note Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D52690 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
