[PATCH] D23434: Don't allow llvm-include-order to intermingle includes from different files.

Zachary Turner via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Aug 12 09:19:13 PDT 2016

That's actually the reason I think it makes more sense in clang tidy. It
can be a configuration option, off by default, and since there is more
control over whether to apply fixits, and it doesn't apply fixits by
default, it would be easier to iterate on the experimental nature of it
without messing up code

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:14 AM Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>

> alexfh added a comment.
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D23434#513839, @djasper wrote:
> > I think we got confused. We once had tried to write an experimental
> separate check to comply with Google's style guide. If you want to fiddle
> around with that, contact me, I can send you pointers. But as I mentioned
> we moved away from that. And I think it makes more sense to re-create the
> sort-across-blocks functionality in clang-format and not in clang-tidy.
> Yep, we definitely got confused. That experimental check actually
> implemented cross-block sorting, but this caused a bunch of issues. Which
> makes me think that proper implementation of cross-block include sorting is
> challenging be it in clang-format or clang-tidy. Clang-format probably
> makes it even more complex, since a higher safety of transformations is
> expected from it.
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D23434
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20160812/dc4121cd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the cfe-commits mailing list