Re: Some points on clang-format usage

Miklos Vajna <vmiklos -AT- collabora.com>

Mon, 4 Nov 2019 11:38:34 +0100

Hi Stephan, On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:08:43AM +0100, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com> wrote:

And another point that just occurred to me is that we will probably run into
problems at some point in the future:  It is likely that future C++
standards will introduce constructs that cannot be parsed by clang-format
5.0.0, and that LO will use such constructs in files that are processed by
clang-format.

I'm happy to investigate an upgrade if there is a practical need for it. I'm not sure we have any of that today; perhaps structured bindings? But limiting the number of upgrades (to avoid reformat noise) probably has some value. Regards, Miklos

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Context

Re: Some points on clang-format usage · Stephan Bergmann

Re: Some points on clang-format usage · Miklos Vajna

Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.