[libcxx-commits] [PATCH] D110598: [libc++] P0980R1 (constexpr std::string)

[Nikolas Klauser via Phabricator via libcxx-commits]

philnik marked 3 inline comments as done.
philnik added inline comments.


================
Comment at: libcxx/test/std/strings/basic.string/string.access/at.pass.cpp:58
+  {
+    typedef std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, min_allocator<char> > S;
     test(S(), 0);
----------------
Quuxplusone wrote:
> philnik wrote:
> > Quuxplusone wrote:
> > > This whitespace change is gratuitous; notice that we're inside a `TEST_STD_VER >= 11` block here. (Generally speaking, please don't listen to clang-format.)
> > I didn't even notice that clang-format changed that. But since it doesn't hurt anything I would just leave it there, so you can just run clang-format and don't worry about changing some random part of the file (which is exactly what happened). Otherwise, what would even be the point of having a clang-format file at all?
> In my opinion there //is// no point. Arguably, the clang-format file is actively harmful, because //every time// someone new joins the project we have to have this conversation about how clang-format messes things up and you shouldn't trust it. (However, this is also arguably no worse than the alternative, which is that we have to have a conversation about why there is //no// clang-format file. Basically you can't win.)
Should I even bother reformatting the tests to match LLVM style then, or just leave it as is?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D110598/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D110598