whisperity added a comment.
It would be interesting to add a test for this. I've recently came across the
fact that Clang doesn't support //common linkage// definitions, namely that in
**C** (but not in C++), if you do the following:
int I;
void f1(void) {}
int I;
void f2(void) {}
and compile these two source files and link them together, the two `I`s will
refer in the resulting binary to the same symbol. (You must not put an
initialiser here!) Will `int I;` being in a header, with no initialiser, be
caught?
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/misc/DefinitionsInHeadersCheck.h:26
+/// - `CheckCCode`: Adds C99 to the minimum Language Requirements for this
+/// Checker. Disabled by default because this Checker wasn't build for C.
/// - `HeaderFileExtensions`: a semicolon-separated list of filename
----------------
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/misc-definitions-in-headers.rst:109
+ When `true` C99 is added to the minimum language requirements for this
+ Cecker. Default is `false` because this Checker was not build for C.
----------------
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111909/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111909
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
