jansvoboda11 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:822
+
static bool ParseAnalyzerArgs(AnalyzerOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args,
DiagnosticsEngine &Diags) {
----------------
dexonsmith wrote:
> Can you rename this `ParseAnalyzerArgsImpl` for better readability?
I left this unchanged to keep the diff (and merge conflicts) minimal. We would
rename it back to `ParseAnalyzerArgs` in a few weeks anyway (when we drop
granular round-tripping in favor of one big round-trip).
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp:1002
+
+ return RoundTrip(Parse, Generate, Swap, Res, Args, Diags, "AnalyzerOptions");
+}
----------------
dexonsmith wrote:
> I wonder if these lambdas could/should just be defined inline in the call to
> `RoundTrip`, but up to you to decide.
Why not, clang-format handles the inline lambdas pretty well.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95369/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95369
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
