Hide IsoSpec using pimpl and add some clang-tidy performance fixes on top

[timosachsenberg]

Description

clang-tidy fixes
cppcoreguidelines-virtual-class-destructor
misc-redundant-expression,
performance-trivially-destructible
performance-noexcept-move-constructor

Checklist:

• Make sure that you are listed in the AUTHORS file
• Add relevant changes and new features to the CHANGELOG file
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Updated or added python bindings for changed or new classes. (Tick if no updates were necessary.)

How can I get additional information on failed tests during CI:

If your PR is failing you can check out

• http://cdash.openms.de/index.php?project=OpenMS and look for your PR. If you click in the column that lists the failed tests you will get detailed error messages.

Note:

• Once you opened a PR try to minimize the number of pushes to it as every push will trigger CI (automated builds and test) and is rather heavy on our infrastructure (e.g., if several pushes per day are performed).

[hroest]

I see this is helpful, but how does clang know that something cannot throw?

[timosachsenberg]

Today I learned that in case of these partial types we also need to put the default destructor into the cpp file, In header it fails.

[timosachsenberg]

tests passed

[cbielow]

nitpicking here but:
would it make sense to move the copy ctor up into the area of all other ctors?! Just to have them all in one place, in case someone is checking them and sees that this one seems "missing"?

[cbielow]

same here

[cbielow]

I see this is helpful, but how does clang know that something cannot throw?

Do you mean noexcept? It cannot. We are just promising it does not (or bare the consequences).

[cbielow]

looks fine to me

[hroest]

I assume you then also dont need these definitions in the header any more?

[timosachsenberg]

Yes I will remove them

[timosachsenberg]

rebuild jenkins

[timosachsenberg]

passed

[hroest]

I see this is helpful, but how does clang know that something cannot throw?

Do you mean noexcept? It cannot. We are just promising it does not (or bare the consequences).

@cbielow @timosachsenberg yes exactly that was my point, how can clang-tidy automatically add noexcept -- shouldnt we check this manually?

[timosachsenberg]

I think it checks all called functions for throw. If there is none it adds noexcept.