compnerd added inline comments.

================
Comment at: 
clang-tools-extra/clang-tidy/readability/ContainerDataPointerCheck.cpp:18
+namespace tidy {
+namespace readability {
+ContainerDataPointerCheck::ContainerDataPointerCheck(StringRef Name,
----------------
Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> compnerd wrote:
> > 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?
> Hard to tell about current state of clang-format, but you could take a look 
> on existing checks code.
I would prefer that we fix the clang-format configuration rather than manually 
change the formatting here.  This is introducing a new set of files, so it 
isn't resulting in inconsistency in a single file.  I don't mind reformatting 
the code with clang-format, but generally, that is considered the definitive 
arbiter for formatting.


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

Reply via email to