aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================ Comment at: test/Modules/double-quotes.m:27-29 +// CHECK: double-quoted include "A0.h" in framework header, expected angle-bracketed include <A/A0.h> instead +// CHECK: double-quoted include "B.h" in framework header, expected angle-bracketed include <B.h> instead +// CHECK: double-quoted include "B.h" in framework header, expected angle-bracketed include <B.h> instead ---------------- dexonsmith wrote: > When there's a fixit, you don't need to list it in the warning text (the > fix-it itself is sufficient). I also feel like "quoted include" is as clear > as "double-quoted include" (but more succinct). So I think these would be > better as: > > > warning: quoted include "..." in framework header, expected angle-bracketed > > include instead > Some other lexer diagnostics use "double-quoted" when they want to distinguish with "angle-bracketed" (see `warn_pragma_include_alias_mismatch_angle` and `warn_pragma_include_alias_mismatch_quote` as examples). I don't have a strong opinion on what form we use, but I'd prefer for it to be consistent exposition. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47157 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
