enabled and fixed modernize-pass-by-value clang-tidy warnings

[firewave]

No description provided.

[firewave]

Do we have a check for this? That would be quite a few false negatives to look into...

[chrchr-github]

Sure do: https://github.com/danmar/cppcheck/blob/e6f2929fac7d093b3488dc3d0af03936c7030fef/lib/checkother.cpp#L1309

[danmar]

We don't have a checker that recommends to pass by value and use std::move.

We do have the checker that recommends to pass by reference that chr pointed out but I am not sure how valid that is after std::move was added to C++.

[chrchr-github]

Right, I misread the title, thinking it was about passing by reference.

[firewave]

So I will just file a basic "new check" ticket which will sit there for a while just for completeness sake. If there isn't any yet...

[firewave]

This seems to trigger a bug in the naming add-on. I am not able to look into/work on that. Any takers are welcome and I can rebase it after that issue was fixed.

[firewave]

I suppressed the naming-varname warning for now until it works properly. I also filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/11210 about this.

[firewave]

I suppressed the naming-varname warning for now until it works properly. I also filed https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/11210 about this.

The need for multiple suppressions seems a bit strange. I wonder if this is related to it being an addon.

[firewave]

The need for multiple suppressions seems a bit strange. I wonder if this is related to it being an addon.

It appears this is already tracked as https://trac.cppcheck.net/ticket/2799