wgml added a comment.
Thanks you all for your participation in the review process. I guess it is done
now.
I don't have write access to the repositories, @aaron.ballman, could you apply
the patch on my behalf?
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/modernize/ConcatNestedNamespacesCheck.cpp:31
+static bool singleNamedNamespaceChild(const NamespaceDecl &ND) {
+ const NamespaceDecl::decl_range Decls = ND.decls();
+ if (std::distance(Decls.begin(), Decls.end()) != 1)
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> wgml wrote:
> > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > We usually only const-qualify local declarations when they're
> > > pointers/references, so you can drop the `const` here (and in several
> > > other places). It's not a hard and fast rule, but the clutter is not
> > > useful in such small functions.
> > From my perspective, `const` is a easy way of declaring that my intention
> > is only to name given declaration only for reading and to improve code
> > readability.
> I wasn't making a value judgement about the coding style so much as pointing
> out that this is novel to the code base and we tend to avoid novel constructs
> unless there's a good reason to deviate. I don't see a strong justification
> here, so I'd prefer them to be removed for consistency.
Okay then, adjusted.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52136
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
