[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] [RFC] Adding support for clang-format making further code modifying changes

[Renato Golin via cfe-dev]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 17:43, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:

> Mixed feelings - we don't necessarily have to let users dictate the
> feature set, if they aren't contributing to it. Like users using
> -Weverything, that is ill advised and we are/should be more than happy to
> break them at any turn. We do get to make choices about what uses we are
> developing the tools for.
>

Ah, that's not what I meant. I agree with you.

I meant there is a lot of potential for things that we (LLVM developers)
are saying we want (in this thread) and we should pursue it without having
to be bound by the "original design".

I think that's more-or-less what MyDeveloperDay has been saying? I think
> that sounds reasonable to me (we could potentially rename the existing
> features that do change more than whitespace, like include sorting - to
> match the naming convention of "this changes the token sequence/can have an
> effect on how/whether code compiles" - while keeping it on by default for
> backwards compatibility).
>

It is, intentionally so. I didn't mean to hijack the thread, just validate
the original point.

Like the miscommunication you pointed above, this was a reply to a specific
point to stick to the original design for the sake of "this is what we
wanted back then", which I don't think it's a good policy.

--renato
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20210810/78a73673/attachment.html>