[clang-tools-extra] Refactor clang doc comment structure (PR #142273)

[Paul Kirth via cfe-commits]

================
@@ -45,6 +45,25 @@ enum class InfoType {
   IT_typedef
 };
 
+enum class CommentKind {
+  CK_FullComment,
+  CK_ParagraphComment,
+  CK_TextComment,
+  CK_InlineCommandComment,
+  CK_HTMLStartTagComment,
+  CK_HTMLEndTagComment,
+  CK_BlockCommandComment,
+  CK_ParamCommandComment,
+  CK_TParamCommandComment,
+  CK_VerbatimBlockComment,
+  CK_VerbatimBlockLineComment,
+  CK_VerbatimLineComment,
+  CK_Unknown
+};
----------------
ilovepi wrote:

Should we just use the CommentKind from the clang AST? I haven't looked but I would also suppose that those have parsers already to go to/from the enum. It isn't a huge deal, but if we don't need to maintain that code ourselves .... it could be a good option. That said, I don't think we tablegen things w/ `enum class` so it may not be that great in the end. Anyway worth considering. I'm OK either way if there's a decent reason.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142273