5chmidti wrote: > Good point, maybe we can use more smart way to do warning: only warn the > global option is set but local option is not. > > Have some redundant options is not the aim for this deprecation things, we > only want to avoid user suddenly find the behaviors of lots of check are > changed. So we only need to warn for config which rely on global option and > no local option.
Your implementation of this looks good. > I wonder however how it will work for people who are stuck in old clang-tidy > files for whatever reason - this warning can be very noisy if running > clang-tidy in CI with lots of files. Do we need some CLI option to allow > users to silence the warnings? Adding a flag would either entail deprecating it again, or deciding that it is kept for future deprecations (and would therefore need to be general enough). Maybe something like `--[quiet/no]-config-warnings`? There are 11 `StrictMode` options, and 21 `IgnoreMacros` options, so there could be potentially 32 warnings for each checked file of a project, which is a lot. IMO, we don't *need* a flag, but it would make for a better user experience. On the other hand, configs could be easily adjusted. Unless someone is in the position that you've described, that they have no control over the `.clang-tidy` file. While most projects would probably welcome those changes, some users may just want things to work without drowning in config warnings, and so they may prefer having the flag. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/121057 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
