[PATCH] D41716: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: alexfh, piotrdz. And also enable it by default to be consistent with e.g. modernize-use-using. This helps e.g. when running this check on client code where the macro is provided by the system, so there is no easy way to modify it.

[PATCH] D41716: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D41716#967237, @lebedev.ri wrote: > That changes the defaults though. I thought clang-tidy *tried* to produce the > same results > on different clang-tidy versions with the same `.clang-tidy` config? Or is > there no such guarantees? Hmm,

[PATCH] D41716: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL321913: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to readability-inconsistent-declaration… (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: klimek. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llv

[PATCH] D44366: run-clang-tidy: forward clang-tidy exit status

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rCTE327854: run-clang-tidy: forward clang-tidy exit status (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D44366

[PATCH] D53217: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-equals-delete

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: alexfh, malcolm.parsons. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. And also enable it by default to be consistent with e.g. modernize-use-using. This improves consistency inside the check itself as well: both checks are now disabled in macros

[PATCH] D53217: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-equals-delete

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL30: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-equals-delete (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.o

[PATCH] D53454: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to eadability-redundant-smartptr-get

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: alexfh, sbenza. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, xazax.hun. And also enable it by default to be consistent with e.g. modernize-use-using. This helps e.g. when running this check on client code where the macro is provided by the

[PATCH] D53454: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to eadability-redundant-smartptr-get

vmiklos added a comment. In practice cppunit's `CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE_END` macro triggers this problem. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D53454 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/

[PATCH] D53454: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to eadability-redundant-smartptr-get

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D53454#1270298, @JonasToth wrote: > LGTM, but could you please add a short notice in the release notes? Sure, I will do that. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D53454 _

[PATCH] D53454: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to eadability-redundant-smartptr-get

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL344871: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-redundant-smartptr-get (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL350922: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor' (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D543

[PATCH] D56966: [clang-tidy] misc-non-private-member-variables-in-classes: ignore implicit methods

vmiklos marked 8 inline comments as done. vmiklos added a comment. I also noticed I forgot to clang-format the testcase, done now. Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/NonPrivateMemberVariablesInClassesCheck.cpp:21 AST_MATCHER(CXXRecordDecl, hasMethods) { + for (const auto &Method :

[PATCH] D56966: [clang-tidy] misc-non-private-member-variables-in-classes: ignore implicit methods

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 182702. vmiklos marked 3 inline comments as done. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56966/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56966 Files: clang-tidy/misc/NonPrivateMemberVariablesInClassesCheck.cpp docs/clang-tidy/checks/misc-non-private-

[PATCH] D56966: [clang-tidy] misc-non-private-member-variables-in-classes: ignore implicit methods

vmiklos added a comment. Sorry, forgot to use the magic line at the end of the commit message to auto-close this review. Done in r351686, anyhow. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56966/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56966 ___

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-pp'

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: JonasToth, alexfh. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, kbarton, xazax.hun, mgorny, nemanjai. Finds potentially redundant preprocessor usage. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/reada

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-pp'

vmiklos added a comment. I've used this check originally on LibreOffice (core, online) code and it found a handful of not necessary ifdef / ifndef lines. It seemed it's simple and generic enough that it would make sense to upstream this. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.ll

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-pp'

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349#1293622, @lebedev.ri wrote: > No one will know for sure what "pp" in "readability-redundant-pp" means. > I'd highly recommend to fully spell it out. Will do. > Also, i'd like to see some analysis of the false-positives. Things I con

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173465. vmiklos retitled this revision from "[clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-pp'" to "[clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'". https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/rea

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos added a comment. > I think that name is not very descriptive for the user of clang-tidy. `pp` > should be `preprocessor` or some other constellation that makes it very clear > its about the preprocessor. Done, renamed to readability-redundant-preprocessor. > you are in namespace `clang

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173468. vmiklos edited the summary of this revision. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readabi

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos added a comment. > preprocessor directives? Same in documentation. Done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173524. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.h docs/Rele

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos added a comment. > What do you think about code like: > > #if FOO == 4 > #if FOO == 4 > #endif > #endif > > #if defined(FOO) > #if defined(FOO) > #endif > #endif > > #if !defined(FOO) > #if !defined(FOO) > #endif > #endif I looked at supporting these, but it

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp:19-22 +struct Entry { + SourceLocation Loc; + std::string MacroName; +}; Szelethus wrote: > This is a way too general name

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173526. vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readabilit

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173554. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.h docs/Rele

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. vmiklos added a comment. > As it stands, I feel like this check is a bit too simplistic to have much > value, but if you covered some of these other cases, it would alleviate that > worry for me. I've now added support for detecting inverted conditions

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173556. vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readabilit

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349#1294600, @vmiklos wrote: > Let's see if that works in practice. I've implemented this now, please take a look. (Extended test + docs as well, as usual.) Thanks! https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173572. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.h docs/Rele

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/readability-redundant-preprocessor.rst:34 + + #ifdef FOO + #ifndef FOO // inner ifndef is considered redundant JonasToth wrote: > The indendation for these

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked 2 inline comments as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp:56-59 +StringRef SourceText = +Lexer::getSourceText(CharSourceRange::getTokenRange(ConditionRange), +

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 173575. vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readabilit

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. As far as I see GCC warns on these 3 things. Comment at: lib/Lex/PPDirectives.cpp:553 } else { const SourceLocation CondBegin = CurPPLexer->getSourceLocation(); // Restore the value of LexingRawMode so that identifiers are

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Oh, and running the `check-clang-tools` target, this currently results in: Failing Tests (3): Clang Tools :: modularize/ProblemsInconsistent.modularize Clang Tools :: pp-trace/pp-trace-conditional.cpp Clang Tools :: pp-trace/pp-trace-macro.cpp Perhaps

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked 2 inline comments as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp:84 +CheckFactories.registerCheck( +"readability-redundant-preprocessor"); CheckFactories.registerCheck( aaron.ba

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 174021. vmiklos marked 2 inline comments as done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readabilit

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 174439. https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349 Files: clang-tidy/readability/CMakeLists.txt clang-tidy/readability/ReadabilityTidyModule.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.h docs/Rele

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked 2 inline comments as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/readability/RedundantPreprocessorCheck.cpp:37 +CheckMacroRedundancy(Loc, Condition, IfStack, + "nested redundant if; consider removing it", +

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-redundant-preprocessor.cpp:53 +// CHECK-NOTES: [[@LINE+1]]:2: warning: nested redundant #if; consider removing it [readability-redundant-preprocessor] +#if FOO == 3 +

[PATCH] D54349: [clang-tidy] new check 'readability-redundant-preprocessor'

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D54349#1301663, @aaron.ballman wrote: > I think this check is in good shape for the initial commit. Additional > functionality can be added incrementally. OK, thanks. I'll lcommit this once https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 is committed. htt

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Could you please review this at some stage? As mentioned previously, this is a dependency for D54349 . Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 _

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Next ping -- could you please review this one? Thanks! :-) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://list

[PATCH] D37634: clang-rename: let -force handle multiple renames

vmiklos created this revision. The use case is that renaming multiple symbols in a large enough codebase is much faster if all of these can be done with a single invocation, but there will be multiple translation units where one or more symbols are not found. Old behavior was to exit with

[PATCH] D37634: clang-rename: let -force handle multiple renames

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL312942: clang-rename: let -force handle multiple renames (authored by vmiklos). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37634?vs=114402&id=114663#toc Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.l

[PATCH] D63621: [git-clang-format] recognize hxx as a C++ file

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: jbcoe, djasper. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, kadircet, ilya-biryukov. Herald added a project: clang. clangd, clang-tidy, etc does that already, no reason why git-clang-format should skip hxx files. Repository: rC Clang https:/

[PATCH] D63621: [git-clang-format] recognize hxx as a C++ file

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL364014: [git-clang-format] recognize hxx as a C++ file (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a project: LLVM. Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits. Changed prior to commit: https://revie

[PATCH] D63621: [git-clang-format] recognize hxx as a C++ file

vmiklos added a comment. Thanks! Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63621/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63621 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Ping, could this be reviewed, please? :-) Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.or

[PATCH] D56025: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix

vmiklos created this revision. vmiklos added reviewers: JonasToth, alexfh, lebedev.ri. Herald added subscribers: cfe-commits, xazax.hun. And also enable it by default to be consistent with e.g. modernize-use-using. This helps e.g. when running this check on client code where the macro is provide

[PATCH] D56025: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 179371. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56025/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56025 Files: clang-tidy/readability/UppercaseLiteralSuffixCheck.cpp clang-tidy/readability/UppercaseLiteralSuffixCheck.h docs/ReleaseNotes.rst docs/cla

[PATCH] D56025: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix

vmiklos marked 2 inline comments as done. vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: test/clang-tidy/readability-uppercase-literal-suffix-integer-macro.cpp:2-3 +// RUN: %check_clang_tidy %s readability-uppercase-literal-suffix %t -- \ +// RUN: -config="{CheckOptions: [{key: r

[PATCH] D56025: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. vmiklos marked an inline comment as done. Closed by commit rL350056: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix (authored by vmiklos, committed by ). Herald added a subscriber: llvm-commits.

[PATCH] D56025: [clang-tidy] add IgnoreMacros option to readability-uppercase-literal-suffix

vmiklos added a comment. In D56025#1340618 , @JonasToth wrote: > LGTM, do you have commit rights? Yes, thanks. Committed now. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D56025/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D56025 __

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. Could you please review this one? It would be especially helpful, due to the depending other review. Thanks! CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 ___ cfe-commits

[PATCH] D54450: Get the correct range of tokens for preprocessor conditions

vmiklos added a comment. @aaron.ballman do you wait for someone else to commit this? Thanks. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D54450 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org ht

[PATCH] D87931: [clang-format] Recognize "hxx" as a C++ header in clang-format-diff.py

vmiklos created this revision. Herald added a project: clang. Herald added a subscriber: cfe-commits. vmiklos requested review of this revision. And shift "proto" to the next line to avoid a too long line. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo https://reviews.llvm.org/D87931 Files: clang/too

[PATCH] D87931: [clang-format] Recognize "hxx" as a C++ header in clang-format-diff.py

vmiklos added a comment. Mydeveloperday, Sam: could you please take a look? Hopefully a trivial one. Thanks :-) There are some larger codebases like LibreOffice that use .hxx as their header file extension, it's a bit inconsistent that .cxx is recognized but .hxx is not. This is meant to fix t

[PATCH] D87931: [clang-format] Recognize "hxx" as a C++ header in clang-format-diff.py

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rGb168bbfae42e: [clang-format] Recognize "hxx" as a C++ header in clang-format-diff.py (authored by vmiklos). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo C

[PATCH] D87931: [clang-format] Recognize "hxx" as a C++ header in clang-format-diff.py

vmiklos added a comment. Thanks for the quick feedback! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D87931/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D87931 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org ht

[PATCH] D148439: [clang-rename] Exit gracefully when no input provided

vmiklos added subscribers: arphaman, klimek. vmiklos added a comment. Looks good to me, but probably you want an approval from @arphaman, @klimek or @kbobyrev before committing. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148439/new/ https://rev

[PATCH] D19201: [clang-tidy] misc-throw-with-noexcept

vmiklos added inline comments. Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/ThrowWithNoexceptCheck.h:20 +///\brief Warns about using throw in function declared as noexcept. +/// It complains about every throw, even if it is caught later. +class ThrowWithNoexceptCheck : public ClangTidyCheck { ---

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945#748135, @malcolm.parsons wrote: > Should this option be shared? If the alternative is to make this a general clang-tidy option where all but these two checks ignore it, I think that's more confusing to the users. Or do you have an ex

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 98108. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945 Files: clang-tidy/modernize/UseDefaultMemberInitCheck.cpp clang-tidy/modernize/UseDefaultMemberInitCheck.h docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-use-default-member-init.rst test/clang-tidy/modernize-use-default-member

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945#748225, @malcolm.parsons wrote: > See uses of `OptionsView::getLocalOrGlobal()`. Ah, I see. Then yes, I think it makes sense; e.g. for the above cppunit case ideally I want to avoid any kind of warning from macros, since none of them

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

vmiklos updated this revision to Diff 98163. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945 Files: clang-tidy/modernize/UseDefaultMemberInitCheck.cpp clang-tidy/modernize/UseDefaultMemberInitCheck.h clang-tidy/modernize/UseUsingCheck.cpp docs/clang-tidy/checks/modernize-use-default-member-init.rst tes

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

vmiklos added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945#748604, @malcolm.parsons wrote: > Please change modernize-use-using to match. Done. https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.l

[PATCH] D32945: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rL302429: clang-tidy: add IgnoreMacros option to modernize-use-default-member-init (authored by vmiklos). Changed prior to commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32945?vs=98163&id=98173#toc Repository: rL L