[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds. This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes. Closed by commit rG4cafc3727b35: [clang-format] Add 'friend' to QualifierOrder (authored by red1bluelost, committed by owenpan). Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

owenpan added a comment. In D139801#3991108 , @MyDeveloperDay wrote: > I also appreciate the concessions made by others to allow clang-format to > alter code as this has opened the doors in my view to 1 or 2 other great code > modification changes. +1

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

red1bluelost added a comment. In that case, when someone has free time, could you commit on my behalf (name: Micah Weston, email: micahswes...@gmail.com). Thank you all for the reviews! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139801/new/ ht

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

MyDeveloperDay added a comment. I know I have situations where I like `inline` and `static` to be in a certain order to avoid them getting constantly swapped around, they are never going to be after the type but I still want them the same way, I'd be ok with allow `friend` for the same reason.

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

owenpan added a comment. In D139801#3989812 , @HazardyKnusperkeks wrote: > My idea would be hardcoded `friend` as first entry, regardless of the chosen > sequence. > But others may have a different opinion on that. It would be confusing with `QAS_Right

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

HazardyKnusperkeks added a comment. In D139801#3989284 , @red1bluelost wrote: > In D139801#3988790 , > @HazardyKnusperkeks wrote: > >> If only the first, I'd say we do that without adding this option. > > I'll w

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

red1bluelost added a comment. In D139801#3988790 , @HazardyKnusperkeks wrote: > If only the first, I'd say we do that without adding this option. I'll work on doing this without adding the option. (Just reread and noticed you had answered what I asked

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

red1bluelost added a comment. I would always want it first. I agree that `friend` would always go first. Had I not accidentally typed in the wrong order I probably wouldn't have know `friend` could be in any position. In the case of putting `friend` always first, would we want a user facing op

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

HazardyKnusperkeks added a comment. I'm normally way more lenient than the most to add features, but here I have to ask do you want it so that you can get `friend` always as first, or do you really want to be able to put `friend` anywhere in the sequence? If only the first, I'd say we do that w

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

MyDeveloperDay added a comment. I guess in principle this looks ok, but lets see what the others think @owenpan , @HazardyKnusperkeks Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139801/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139801 _

[PATCH] D139801: [clang-format] Adds 'friend' to QualifierOrder.

red1bluelost created this revision. red1bluelost added a reviewer: MyDeveloperDay. Herald added a project: All. red1bluelost requested review of this revision. Herald added a project: clang. For cases of defining friend functions, qualifier ordering can allow multiple positions for the 'friend' to