NoQ added a comment. In D84316#2168730 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316#2168730>, @steakhal wrote:
> I wanted to have a separate class for bookkeeping while minimalizing the > necessary changes. > What do you think would be the best way to organize this separation? > > Few notes: > > - Checkers are implemented in the anonymous namespace, so only the given file > has access to them. > - I wanted to separate the bookkeeping logic from the reporting/function > modeling logic in different files. > - I like the fact that after the change the CStringChecker implements only > the evalCall checker callback. > > Let me know if I misunderstood something. Mmm, none of these benefits sound like they outweigh confusing the cost of users with a new checker flag that can't even be used in any sensible way. If you want separate files, just put the checker into a header and include it from multiple cpp files. A few checkers already do that - RetainCountChecker, MPIChecker, UninitializedObjectChecker. There's nothing fundamental about keeping checkers in an anonymous namespace. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D84316 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
