ioeric added a comment.

In, @jdemeule wrote:

> In, @malcolm.parsons wrote:
> > In, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> >
> > > Is there a way to make clang-apply-replacements smarter rather than 
> > > forcing every check to jump through hoops? I'm worried that if we have to 
> > > fix individual checks we'll just run into the same bug later.
> >
> >
> > See 
> >
> I was not aware of //cleanupAroundReplacements//. It should be a better 
> option than fixing every check one by one. I am working on adding it on 
> clang-apply-replacement for now and another review will be propose soon.

That would be awesome Jeremy! Thanks!

I think it might be easier if you convert all replacements to 
`tooling::AtomicChange` and use `applyAtomicChanges` 
 in clang-apply-replacements.

Let me know if you have any question, and I'm happy to review the patch when 
it's ready!

  rCTE Clang Tools Extra

cfe-commits mailing list

Reply via email to