On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 8:37 AM Benjamin Kramer wrote:
> -Wmissing-prototype only warns for functions, I want to catch classes
> too.
Ah, fair enough. Yeah, a clang-tidy check for things in the global
namespace that are in a main file rather than a header could be another
pivot there.
> Also f
-Wmissing-prototype only warns for functions, I want to catch classes
too. Also functions in the global namespace with a prototype are still
badness in some coding styles. The limitation on definitions was to
cut down on false positives, the current version of the patch doesn't
have that limitation
This seems to have a lot of overlap with -Wmissing-prototype, really - what
do you think of the overlap/distinction between the two?
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 1:25 PM Eugene Zelenko via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Eugene.Zelenko added a subscriber: Eugene.Zelenko.
> Eugene.Zel
Eugene.Zelenko added a subscriber: Eugene.Zelenko.
Eugene.Zelenko added a comment.
Please mention this check in docs/ReleaseNotes.rst (in alphabetical order).
https://reviews.llvm.org/D23130
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
ht
bkramer created this revision.
bkramer added a reviewer: alexfh.
bkramer added a subscriber: cfe-commits.
This is prone to ODR violations and generally frowned upon in many
codebases (e.g. LLVM). The checker flags definitions, variables and
classes in the global namespace. Common false positives l
