[clang-tidy] NFC use CHECK-NOTES in tests for performance-move-constructor-init

[alexfh]

test/clang-tidy/performance-move-constructor-init.cpp

115–117

This is an example of not very useful CHECK-NOTES patterns. The corresponding notes are issued in Clang and there's not much value in testing them here. They also duplicate the CHECK-FIXES pattern below. Should the script filter these notes out, maybe?

[JonasToth]

test/clang-tidy/performance-move-constructor-init.cpp

115–117

I agree that they dont add any value.
I try to change the filtering regex to give a pass to note: FIX-IT

[JonasToth]

• adjust regex in check_clang_tidy

[JonasToth]

check_clang_tidy now ignores note: FIX-IT, so only diagnostics directly emitted from the check are tested

[JonasToth]

• fix spurious change

[lebedev.ri]

test/clang-tidy/check_clang_tidy.py

172 ↗

(On Diff #167918)

SGTM, if it works.

[JonasToth]

• filter with builtin python before passing to FileCheck

[JonasToth]

-note remove spurious reordering

test/clang-tidy/check_clang_tidy.py

172 ↗

(On Diff #167918)

Unfortunatly didnt work with LLVM regex, doing in python now

[JonasToth]

• finally remove spurious change

[alexfh]

LG. Thanks

test/clang-tidy/performance-move-constructor-init.cpp

struct B {
   B() {}
   B(const B&) {}
   B(B &&) {}
 };
 
 struct D : B {
   D() : B() {}
   D(const D &RHS) : B(RHS) {}
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+3]]:16: warning: move constructor initializes base class by calling a copy constructor [performance-move-constructor-init]
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: 26:3: note: copy constructor being called
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: 27:3: note: candidate move constructor here
+  // CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE+3]]:16: warning: move constructor initializes base class by calling a copy constructor [performance-move-constructor-init]
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 26:3: note: copy constructor being called
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 27:3: note: candidate move constructor here
   D(D &&RHS) : B(RHS) {}
 };
 
 struct E : B {
   E() : B() {}
   E(const E &RHS) : B(RHS) {}
   E(E &&RHS) : B(move(RHS)) {} // ok
 };

 
 struct K {}; // Has implicit copy and move constructors, is trivially copyable
 struct L : K {
   L(L &&RHS) : K(RHS) {} // ok
 };
 
 struct M {
   B Mem;
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: :[[@LINE+1]]:16: warning: move constructor initializes class member by calling a copy constructor [performance-move-constructor-init]
+  // CHECK-NOTES: :[[@LINE+1]]:16: warning: move constructor initializes class member by calling a copy constructor [performance-move-constructor-init]
   M(M &&RHS) : Mem(RHS.Mem) {}
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 26:3: note: copy constructor being called
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 27:3: note: candidate move constructor here
 };
 
 struct N {
   B Mem;
   N(N &&RHS) : Mem(move(RHS.Mem)) {}
 };
 
 struct O {

 struct TriviallyCopyable {
   TriviallyCopyable() = default;
   TriviallyCopyable(TriviallyCopyable &&) = default;
   TriviallyCopyable(const TriviallyCopyable &) = default;
 };
 
 struct Positive {
   Positive(Movable M) : M_(M) {}
-  // CHECK-MESSAGES: [[@LINE-1]]:12: warning: pass by value and use std::move [modernize-pass-by-value]
+  // CHECK-NOTES: [[@LINE-1]]:12: warning: pass by value and use std::move [modernize-pass-by-value]
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 7:1: note: FIX-IT applied suggested code changes
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 113:28: note: FIX-IT applied suggested code changes
+  // CHECK-NOTES: 113:29: note: FIX-IT applied suggested code changes
   // CHECK-FIXES: Positive(Movable M) : M_(std::move(M)) {}
   Movable M_;
 };
 
 struct NegativeMultipleInitializerReferences {
   NegativeMultipleInitializerReferences(Movable M) : M_(M), n_(M) {}
   Movable M_;
   Movable n_;