Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 8, 2021. It is now read-only.

cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories #206

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 6, 2020
Merged

cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories #206

merged 8 commits into from
Mar 6, 2020

Conversation

coryan
Copy link
Contributor

@coryan coryan commented Mar 6, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our clang-tidy builds to use the same
versions of clang-format, clang-tidy, doxygen, buildifier,
shellcheck, and cmake_format.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(-pubsub and -spanner), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used <U> (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.

Part of the work for #204

This change is Reviewable

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Mar 6, 2020
@coryan
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories
4faa33c 
Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
@coryan coryan changed the title cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories. cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories Mar 6, 2020
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 6, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #206 into master will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #206      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.25%   96.26%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          97       97              
  Lines        4409     4421      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits         4244     4256      +12     
  Misses        165      165
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
google/cloud/future_generic_test.cc 98.91% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/future_void.h 96.87% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/internal/completion_queue_impl.cc 86.48% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/internal/filesystem_test.cc 96.26% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/future_void_test.cc 98.94% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/testing_util/expect_exception.h 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/internal/future_impl_test.cc 97.95% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/optional_test.cc 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
...ogle/cloud/testing_util/scoped_environment_test.cc 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
google/cloud/testing_util/expect_future_error.h 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
... and 11 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 00175c5...2cb3562. Read the comment docs.

@coryan coryan marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2020 14:38
devbww
devbww approved these changes Mar 6, 2020
View reviewed changes
google/cloud/internal/format_time_point.cc Show resolved Hide resolved
google/cloud/internal/format_time_point.cc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
google/cloud/internal/format_time_point.cc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
google/cloud/internal/format_time_point.cc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@coryan
Copy link
Contributor Author

coryan commented Mar 6, 2020

I fixed the inconsistent auto constexpr vs. constexpr int and also went all east const with the constexprs.
PTAL.

@coryan coryan merged commit c26a613 into googleapis:master Mar 6, 2020
@coryan coryan deleted the use-fedora-for-clang-tidy branch March 6, 2020 16:35
devjgm pushed a commit to devjgm/google-cloud-cpp that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2020
@coryan
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories (googleapis/google-c…
cbc7ea7 
…loud-cpp-common#206)

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
devjgm pushed a commit to devjgm/google-cloud-cpp that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2020
@coryan @devjgm
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories (googleapis/google-c…
265f762 
…loud-cpp-common#206)

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
coryan added a commit to coryan/google-cloud-cpp that referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2020
@coryan
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories (googleapis/google-c…
b69129c 
…loud-cpp-common#206)

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
coryan added a commit to coryan/google-cloud-cpp that referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2020
@coryan
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories (googleapis/google-c…
73b51bf 
…loud-cpp-common#206)

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
coryan added a commit to coryan/google-cloud-cpp that referenced this pull request Apr 24, 2020
@coryan
cleanup: use same clang-tidy in all repositories (googleapis/google-c…
88d63de 
…loud-cpp-common#206)

Use the clang-tidy distributed with Fedora (currently clang-tidy-9) in
this repository. I am planning to make similar changes in the other
repositories and bring all our `clang-tidy` builds to use the same
versions of `clang-format`, `clang-tidy`, `doxygen`, `buildifier`,
`shellcheck`, and `cmake_format`.

I also updated the clang-tidy configuration to match the newer repos
(`-pubsub` and `-spanner`), and cleaned up any errors found in the
files.

Finally, fixed a number of Doxygen comments that used `<U>` (for a
template parameter) which Doxygen thought was an unordered list or
something.
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@devbww devbww devbww approved these changes

@devjgm devjgm Awaiting requested review from devjgm

@mr-salty mr-salty Awaiting requested review from mr-salty

@scotthart scotthart Awaiting requested review from scotthart

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@coryan @devbww @googlebot