Typz added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D42787#1127790, @djasper wrote:
> The normal rule for formatting options apply. If you can dig up a public > style guide and a project of reasonable size where it is used, we can add an > option. I don't want to be rude, but it seems to me that in this context this response is just a polite way of saying "no" : as discussed already on this patch, this is indeed a corner case, and probably not documented anywere, and as far as I understand, the current behavior is not referenced in llvm or google coding rule either. This is simply the styling that the maintainers find the most appropriate. Hence my question: I know the "rules", but I want to know if you would be open to introducing options for tweaking this, in case people do not agree this is the most appropriate. Typically, for such corner cases I could imagine a nested option, similar to custom brace wrapping, so that the "basic" namespace option is not poluted, but further customization can be defined in a nested "advanced" option. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D42787 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
