whisperity added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/bugprone/EasilySwappableParametersCheck.cpp:402-403
+
+ // Unfortunately, undersquiggly highlights are for some reason chewed up
+ // and not respected by diagnostics from Clang-Tidy. :(
+ diag(First->getLocation(), "the first parameter in the range is '%0'",
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> whisperity wrote:
> > whisperity wrote:
> > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > whisperity wrote:
> > > > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > > > Can you post a screenshot of what you mean?
> > > > > Given
> > > > >
> > > > > ```
> > > > > Diag << SourceRange{First->getSourceRange().getBegin(),
> > > > > Last->getSourceRange().getEnd()};
> > > > > ```
> > > > >
> > > > > The diagnostic is still produced with only a `^` at the original
> > > > > `diag(Location)`, ignoring the fed `SourceRange`:
> > > > >
> > > > > ```
> > > > > /home/whisperity/LLVM/Build/../llvm-project/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-easily-swappable-parameters-len2.cpp:21:18:
> > > > > warning: 3 adjacent parameters of 'redeclChain' of similar type
> > > > > ('int') are easily swapped by mistake
> > > > > [bugprone-easily-swappable-parameters]
> > > > > void redeclChain(int I, int J, int K) {}
> > > > > ^
> > > > > ```
> > > > >
> > > > > Instead of putting all the squigglies in as the range-location
> > > > > highlight, like how `Sema` can diagnose:
> > > > >
> > > > > ```
> > > > > /home/whisperity/LLVM/Build/../llvm-project/clang-tools-extra/test/clang-tidy/checkers/bugprone-easily-swappable-parameters-len2.cpp:21:18:
> > > > > warning: 3 adjacent parameters of 'redeclChain' of similar type
> > > > > ('int') are easily swapped by mistake
> > > > > [bugprone-easily-swappable-parameters]
> > > > > void redeclChain(int I, int J, int K) {}
> > > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > > > ```
> > > > >
> > > > > I would not want to put additional note tags in an otherwise already
> > > > > verbose output.
> > > > >
> > > > > Back in 2019 I was investigating this issue specifically for another
> > > > > checker I was working on, but hit the wall... Somewhere deep inside
> > > > > where Tidy diagnostic stuff is translated and consumed to Clang
> > > > > stuff, it goes away. It shouldn't, because there are statements that
> > > > > seemingly copy the `Diag.Ranges` array over, but it still does not
> > > > > come out.
> > > > >
> > > > > ... EDIT: I found [[
> > > > > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2019-October/063676.html |
> > > > > the relevant mailing list post ]].
> > > > > ... EDIT: I found the relevant mailing list post.
> > > >
> > > > Oh wow, I had no idea! That's a rather unfortunate bug. :-(
> > > Speaking of bugs, shall I put it up on Bugzilla, or see if anyone
> > > reported already? Would require me digging into that "where are the data
> > > structures copied" kind of thing to figure it out again.
> > Nevermind, this is worth [[ http://bugzilla.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
> > | a bug report ]] just so we can track it in the proper location.
> If you don't mind doing that effort, it'd be appreciated! Even if you don't
> root cause the issue, having the report (or pinging an existing one) is still
> useful.
And I managed to post a broken link originally... Here's the right one:
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49000
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
