evelez7 wrote: > This is a good start, but I thin we'll want some more tests, and probably > some unit test coverage. Unittesting is especially nice, since I believe this > backend doesn't need any of the asset files, right?
Yeah, this doesn't need assets, so I'll be able to call things directly for unit tests. > As for whether this should follow the pattern of YAML or HTML ... I'm > conflicted for the same reasons you are. But maybe there's a better way for > us to generate the filename that doesn't need the USR? like could we get the > mangled name and use that? I'd hope those would be different enough to not > conflict. Alternatively, maybe we should look at a way we can merge all the > related docinfo together at an earlier step. I'll investigate this. Although right off the bat, the names in the Infos aren't mangled. `Name` and `FullName` are the same for both records, which is unfortunate. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/142483 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
