NagyDonat wrote: > I don't think I have time for this. I'm really sorry. I read the first couple > paragraphs then gave up. I'm really short of time. The two commits made sense. And resolved most if not all of my major concerns.
I see, and I understand that this review process became much longer than the ideal. Unfortunately, I have major concerns with this PR and would not like to merge it as is. Based on your comments I suspect that you are misunderstanding the situation, and that's what I'm trying to explain in my long comment https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139256#issuecomment-2895183010 . > What would it take to merge this ASAP? Just please let me return to the trivial solution where each `CheckerFamily` directly defines its `StringRef getDebugName() override { return ClassName; }`. I'm strongly convinced that this is the most elegant approach (as I explained this in my long comment https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139256#issuecomment-2895183010 ). I would not be opposed to eliminate this one last piece of boilerplate in follow-up commits _if there is a clear solution_ but the current state of this PR is NOT a clear solution. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139256 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
