Eugene.Zelenko added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:141 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ +- Added a setting ``bugprone-assert-side-effect.FunctionExceptions`` for + a comma-separated list of the names of functions or methods to be considered ---------------- carlosgalvezp wrote: > Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > > Please separate with newline and use single back-ticks for options. > I introduced those double backticks due to review comments. As it turns out, > single backticks are only for links, not for formatted text. Should they be > brought back? Double back-ticks are for language constructs, single back-ticks for options, tool names, etc. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D116478/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D116478 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
