alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46159#1086487, @alexfh wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46159#1086479, @pfultz2 wrote: > > > > But still, could you explain the use case and why a local modification of > > > clang-tidy is not an option? > > > > Because I would like to direct users to try an alpha check on their local > > codebases without having to tell them to rebuild clang. > > > Okay, let's go with a hidden flag (something explicit enough, e.g. > `-allow-enabling-static-analyzer-alpha-checkers`) Or similar to what Roman suggested: `-allow-enabling-static-analyzer-alpha-checkers-yes-i-know-they-can-be-broken` ;) Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D46159 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
