compnerd added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/readability/ContainerDataPointerCheck.cpp:18
+namespace tidy {
+namespace readability {
+ContainerDataPointerCheck::ContainerDataPointerCheck(StringRef Name,
----------------
Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> compnerd wrote:
> > Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> > > Please separate with empty line.
> > Hmm, this is what clang-format does, which should be unambiguously correct.
> > Is there something that needs to be changed in clang-format or
> > .clang-format?
> Hard to tell about current state of clang-format, but you could take a look
> on existing checks code.
I would prefer that we fix the clang-format configuration rather than manually
change the formatting here. This is introducing a new set of files, so it
isn't resulting in inconsistency in a single file. I don't mind reformatting
the code with clang-format, but generally, that is considered the definitive
arbiter for formatting.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D108893/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D108893
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
