MyDeveloperDay added a comment. In D137327#4233551 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137327#4233551>, @thieta wrote:
> In D137327#4233290 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137327#4233290>, > @MyDeveloperDay wrote: > >> because of https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/61785 should this >> really be reverted? is basically saying `X * Y {` must be `X *Y{` but >> that obviously not the case > > Tricky one. Any ideas on how we could differentiate those two cases? Maybe > impossible? Not sure what the normal way to handle ambiguous things like that > in clang-format is. I would prefer we avoid the regression that this issue caused, even if both are equally viable. because otherwise we get blamed for "changing defaults" @owenpan, @HazardyKnusperkeks what are your thoughts? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137327/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137327 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
