MyDeveloperDay added inline comments.
================
Comment at: docs/clang-tidy/checks/abseil-duration-double-conversion.rst:20
+
+
+ // Original - Conversion to integer and back again
----------------
hwright wrote:
> Eugene.Zelenko wrote:
> > Unnecessary empty line.
> This is consistent with other documentation in this directory, such as
> `abseil-faster-strsplit-delimiter.rst`.
In your example `abseil-faster-strsplit-delimiter.rst` , The double blank line
in the html doesn't give much delineation between the before and after code and
the next example.
{F7867869}
There probably isn't a convention per say (which is a shame), across the docs
we do a mixture of different styles
https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability-braces-around-statements.html
https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/android-cloexec-accept.html
https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/google-objc-function-naming.html
But there is a desire by some of the regular clang-tidy reviewers to make the
documentation consistent
It may not be ideal but the "Before/After" style, that is used in
`modernize-use-emplace`,
`modernize-use-using`,`readability-braces-around-statements`,`readability-identifier-naming`
and `readability-redundant-function-ptr-dereference` does help a little.
I'm not saying looks better, but I've added a couple of examples of formatting
the strsplit example for comparison, feel free to ignore.
{F7867960}
{F7868028}
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57353/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57353
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
