https://github.com/kadircet commented:
LG for include-cleaner changes.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140233
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
unfortunately neither is used by include-cleaner. we only support mappings for
c++ STL, through
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Tooling/Inclusions/Stdlib/StdSymbolMap.inc
and friends.
we didn't want to add any system specific libraries, especially base
kadircet wrote:
> I think we need to understand what we want before we can make decisions on
> what needs changing, though. Are there invariants we want to introduce, like
> the source range for the AST node should encompass the source locations
> tracked within the AST node? Or are we fine wi
kadircet wrote:
changes in include-cleaner LG, but I am not sure about the canonical way of
tracking this location in clang (i.e. if we're going to track an expression
within the attribute, do we still need to tract the underlying decl as well?
can't we just extract it from expr when needed?)
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+InheritParentConfig: false
kadircet wrote:
are we running any tests in this directory? these inputs are usually copied to
temp test directories, since you're not copying this over in any of the tests,
is this really needed? (or do we have some te
@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@
# RUN: echo 'printf "End of search list.\r\n" >&2' >> %t.dir/bin/my_driver.sh
# RUN: chmod +x %t.dir/bin/my_driver.sh
+# Create fake clang-tidy config to ensure sandbox
+# RUN: echo 'InheritParentConfig: false' >> %t.dir/.clang-tidy
kadircet
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141410
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
LGTM, but cc @llvm/clang-area-team, in case they have any concerns here
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140870
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139463
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -141,16 +143,41 @@ std::vector generateMissingIncludeDiagnostics(
AST.getPreprocessor().getHeaderSearchInfo(), MainFile});
llvm::StringRef HeaderRef{Spelling};
-bool Angled = HeaderRef.starts_with("<");
+
+bool IsAngled = false;
kadirce
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks a lot!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139463
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141410
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -43,10 +43,18 @@ internal::Matcher callToGet(const
internal::Matcher &OnClass) {
.bind("redundant_get");
}
-internal::Matcher knownSmartptr() {
+internal::Matcher knownSmartptrAny() {
return recordDecl(hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr"));
}
+i
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
do we know why
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.td#L5894-L5901
doesn't declare _EQ version for cc1?
i think instead of working around this in various places, we should unify the
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141584
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141584
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140594
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
thanks, mostly LGTM, please wait on a final look from @HighCommander4 though,
he has more context about this feature overall, maybe the discrepancy on path
vs spelling based match has a story.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/140
@@ -151,6 +164,11 @@ std::vector generateMissingIncludeDiagnostics(
if (!Replacement.has_value())
continue;
+if (Angled && Spelling.front() == '\"') {
kadircet wrote:
yikes, we also need to do this transformation in the other way as well :/
Mig
kadircet wrote:
I'd like to chime in for the issue with source locations and its implications.
Seems like it has been brought up already along the thread.
These might not be as crucial for diagnostic locations (or other clang
purposes) when they're slightly off, but they actually result in big
kadircet wrote:
I'd like to highlight that many tools still only care about declarations
themselves and not the attributes.
The ones that fiddle with attributes need to do it in a special and complicated
way already. Making this less complicated definitely creates some value. But I
think the
kadircet wrote:
> We're currently inconsistent regarding attributes; sometimes we include the
> attributes in the range, sometimes we don't. But declaration source ranges
> are tough to reason about in general because there's many different moving
> parts.
I totally agree. I was asking to cha
https://github.com/kadircet closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141216
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/kadircet approved this pull request.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141229
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ class UseNullptrCheck : public ClangTidyCheck {
bool isLanguageVersionSupported(const LangOptions &LangOpts) const override {
// FIXME this should be CPlusPlus11 but that causes test cases to
// erroneously fail.
-return LangOpts.CPlusPlus || Lan
@@ -44,7 +44,10 @@ internal::Matcher callToGet(const
internal::Matcher &OnClass) {
}
internal::Matcher knownSmartptr() {
- return recordDecl(hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr"));
+ return recordDecl(
+ hasAnyName("::std::unique_ptr", "::std::shared_ptr
https://github.com/kadircet requested changes to this pull request.
thanks a lot for taking a lookg here!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
https://github.com/kadircet edited
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/141092
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
kadircet wrote:
just a high level question, I wasn't following the recent developments closely,
but we seem to have both an `AngledHeaders` and `QuotedHeaders` option. Why are
we only following one here?
I guess the signals for angled includes are much stricter (search paths need to
be marked
901 - 935 of 935 matches
Mail list logo
