alexfh added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ModernizeTidyModule.cpp:58
"modernize-use-bool-literals");
- CheckFactories.registerCheck<UseDefaultCheck>("modernize-use-default");
+
CheckFactories.registerCheck<UseEqualsDefaultCheck>("modernize-use-equals-default");
CheckFactories.registerCheck<UseEmplaceCheck>("modernize-use-emplace");
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> malcolm.parsons wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > What do we want to do, if anything, for people who have scripts using the
> > > old name? Do we want to keep the old name as an alias to the new name for
> > > some period of time?
> > An alias helps if the check was enabled by name, but not if it was disabled
> > by name.
> > If the alias is temporary, would you want a deprecation warning?
> > I wouldn't want to warn about `-checks=modernize*`, but maybe warning for
> > `-checks=modernize-use-default` would be useful.
> > An alias helps if the check was enabled by name, but not if it was disabled
> > by name.
>
> Oye, this is true and unfortunate.
>
> > If the alias is temporary, would you want a deprecation warning?
> > I wouldn't want to warn about -checks=modernize*, but maybe warning for
> > -checks=modernize-use-default would be useful.
>
> I think a deprecation warning would be a helpful feature, but not required. I
> do agree that I would not want a warning for wildcard matches.
>
> I would also be fine if we simply had the documentation for
> `modernize-use-default` forward to the documentation for
> `modernize-use-equals-default` and put a note in there about the old name
> being deprecated and leave in an alias to the old name.
>
> To be complete, I would also be fine if we remove the old name as in this
> patch. I am mostly thinking about what default policy we want to have when
> this situation arises. FWIW, the check was exposed under this name around Oct
> 2015, so it's been in the wild for over a year, and in a public release.
I'd personally prefer to leave the old documentation file with a redirect and a
note about the renaming. Similar to how we treat aliases. WDYT?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D26511
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
