rsmith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46834#1101586, @jkorous wrote:
> We reconsidered this in light of the policy - thanks for pointing that out > Richard! > Just to be sure that I understand it - the policy is meant for CLI and not > serialized diagnostics, right? The policy certainly seems designed around the CLI use case. For serialized diagnostics, it would make sense to either serialize the snippet or enough information that the snippet can be reconstructed. And if that can't be done, or fails to satisfy some other use case, then we should discuss how we proceed -- for instance, we could consider having different diagnostic messages for the case where we have a snippet and for the case where we do not. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D46834 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
