================
@@ -131,12 +137,55 @@ std::string GetExecutablePath(const char *Argv0, void
*MainAddr) {
return llvm::sys::fs::getMainExecutable(Argv0, MainAddr);
}
+void GetAssetFiles(clang::doc::ClangDocContext &CDCtx) {
+ std::error_code Code;
+ for (auto DirIt = llvm::sys::fs::directory_iterator(
+ std::string(UserAssetPath), Code),
+ dir_end = llvm::sys::fs::directory_iterator();
----------------
ilovepi wrote:
I'm not sure this is resolved. I was expecting to see an initialization
pattern, similar to the code example I linked, which is much more typical in
our codebase. We also have a somewhat mixed policy on the use of `auto`
(https://www.llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-auto-type-deduction-to-make-code-more-readable).
Typically, is more readable to use it in a for loop, or for initializing an
iterator, but I'm always hesitant when `auto` is used for multiple
initializations.
```c++
for (llvm::sys::fs::directory_iterator DirIt =
llvm::sys::fs::directory_iterator(
UserAssetPath, Code), DirEnd; ...
```
A using statement may also make this easier to read.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94717
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
