MyDeveloperDay added a comment. In D132131#3771005 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D132131#3771005>, @HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> In D132131#3770170 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D132131#3770170>, > @MyDeveloperDay wrote: > >> My personal preference is a new struct without Enabled > > We go for a new struct. But why without enabled? > Currently we have a boolean on/off switch `AlignTrailingComments`. This > change wanted to add a second boolean to enable aligning ignoring empty > lines, naturally its value only matters if `AlignTrailingComments` is `true`. > My request was to use the existing struct (and I'm still in favor of that, > but not strong enough to fight anything or anybody over it), but a struct > seems to be better than 2 booleans. But an on/off switch still needs to be > there, and at least using the same name as other options `Enabled` seems to > be the most consistent solution. We don’t normally use Enabled for other structs, maybe we don’t use bool but enums (Always, Never, Leave) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D132131/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D132131 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
