David Bar-On

> Please have a look at merge conflict Cached-up with master and resolved the merge conflicts. The conflicts were because the `Debug.Assert(moduleGuid != Guid.Empty)` were removed, while this PR does...

> I assume there's specific context about the indentation of the first attribute in a block of attributes which contains a skip attr, but if so let's be explicit and...

> Could you take your current tests/source/issue-4499.rs file and run it through the latest 1.x rustfmt (use rustup-installed rustfmt from stable or nightly, in a separate project) and then run...

> ... so assuming an input of this: Yes, this is the input I was referring to. > ... everything that's contained within the full span of the function foo...

> ... so assuming an input of this: Yes, this is the input I was referring to. > ... everything that's contained within the full span of the function foo...

With these detailed explanations I believe I now understand much better the approach. However there are still two issues I don't understand. The following explanation of my issues repeat some...

Changed so first line of attributes block i not indented **only inside `impl`**. In all other cases the first line of attributes block is indented, to keep backward compatibility. Initially...

No. the PR doesn't handle nested comments. The current code only check for `*` at the beginning of a (trimmed) line inside a comment, and adds one space before the...

> ... if you write` Closes #issue-number` on its own line in the PR description GitHub can automatically link the PR to the issue. Thanks for the advice. Done (using...

>>The proposed fix seem to also resolve issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/4649. >Could we add test cases for the linked issue if these changes help to resolve what's going on there Added test...