compnerd added a comment. In D108893#2971410 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108893#2971410>, @Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> Thank you for implementing 26817 > <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26817>! But shouldn't this check > belong to `modernize` module? Oh, I was unaware of the PR, I'll tag that in the commit message, thanks! Hmm, I'm somewhat on the fence, but I wouldn't be against the reorganization to `modernize`, only I would prefer that we get that settled before I do the actual rename/move. > Please add documentation and mention new check in Release Notes. Ah, good idea, I'll add that as well. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/readability/ContainerDataPointerCheck.cpp:18 +namespace tidy { +namespace readability { +ContainerDataPointerCheck::ContainerDataPointerCheck(StringRef Name, ---------------- Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > Please separate with empty line. Hmm, this is what clang-format does, which should be unambiguously correct. Is there something that needs to be changed in clang-format or .clang-format? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D108893/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D108893 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
