lebedev.ri added a comment. In D64695#1589740 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695#1589740>, @Manikishan wrote:
> In D64695#1589508 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695#1589508>, @lebedev.ri > wrote: > > > Is there sufficient test coverage as to what happens if `SortPriority` is > > not set? > > > If SortPriority is not set, the Includes will be grouped without sorting, Let me rephrase - for the exiting `.clang-format`s, that don't currently specify `SortPriority`, this introduction of `SortPriority` should not change the header handling. Is that the case, and if so is there sufficient test coverage for that? Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
