steakhal added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:170 + <clang-tidy/checks/cppcoreguidelines-virtual-class-destructor>` involving + `final` classes. The check will not diagnose `final` marked classes, since + those cannot be used as base classes, consequently they can not violate the ---------------- carlosgalvezp wrote: > I believe the convention is to use double-backtick for C++ keywords and > functions, see line 160. Thanks, I'll fix it. I should learn rst for once. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D126891/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D126891 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
