The check gives warnings on static functions, this is allowed per LLVM
code style https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#anonymous-namespaces
Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
Yeah, good call. Do you mind if I first use this as a trigger to start a thread about this style rule on discourse, though? I've been meaning to, it came up in a review recently.
I think there's a fair chance of changing the policy from "require static" to "allow either" or "require anon namespace", and having the issue "live" in clang-tidy might make for a more engaged discussion.
sure, please go ahead. (I found that these warnings are annoying when editing the llvm code file).
I think there's a fair chance of changing the policy from "require static" to "allow either" or "require anon namespace", and having the issue "live" in clang-tidy might make for a more engaged discussion.
Yeah, the code style says require static, I think in practice we allow either.