readability-inconsistent-declaration-parameter-name

Find function declarations which differ in parameter names.

Example:

// in foo.hpp:
void foo(int a, int b, int c);

// in foo.cpp:
void foo(int d, int e, int f); // warning

This check should help to enforce consistency in large projects, where it often happens that a definition of function is refactored, changing the parameter names, but its declaration in header file is not updated. With this check, we can easily find and correct such inconsistencies, keeping declaration and definition always in sync.

Unnamed parameters are allowed and are not taken into account when comparing function declarations, for example:

void foo(int a);
void foo(int); // no warning

One name is also allowed to be a case-insensitive prefix/suffix of the other:

void foo(int count);
void foo(int count_input) { // no warning
  int count = adjustCount(count_input);
}

To help with refactoring, in some cases fix-it hints are generated to align parameter names to a single naming convention. This works with the assumption that the function definition is the most up-to-date version, as it directly references parameter names in its body. Example:

void foo(int a); // warning and fix-it hint (replace "a" to "b")
int foo(int b) { return b + 2; } // definition with use of "b"

In the case of multiple redeclarations or function template specializations, a warning is issued for every redeclaration or specialization inconsistent with the definition or the first declaration seen in a translation unit.

IgnoreMacros

If this option is set to true (default is true), the check will not warn about names declared inside macros.

Strict

If this option is set to true (default is false), then names must match exactly (or be absent).