Regardless of the outcome of this particular style issue, where are we in terms of clang-formatting all the non-third-party C++ in the tree?
I've had a couple of cases of late where the initializers in a pre-existing constructor didn't follow our style, so when I changed the list a tiny bit, the post-clang-format patch showed the whole list as changed (due to any change to the list triggering reformatting the whole thing to our style). I think it would be better for productivity not to have to explain artifacts of clang-format during review, and at this point the way to avoid it would be to make sure the base revision is already clang-formatted. -- Henri Sivonen hsivo...@hsivonen.fi https://hsivonen.fi/ _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
