mprobst added a comment.
Nice, great to see this.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:330
@@ -329,3 +329,3 @@
- if (Style.AlignAfterOpenBracket && Previous.opensScope() &&
- Previous.isNot(TT_ObjCMethodExpr) &&
+ if (Style.AlignAfterOpenBracket == FormatStyle::BAS_AlwaysBreak &&
+ Previous.is(tok::l_paren) && State.Column > getNewLineColumn(State) &&
----------------
Nice.
Maybe add a comment along the lines off `// In "AlwaysBreak" mode, enforce
wrapping directly after the parenthesis by disallowing any further line breaks
if there is no line break after the opening parenthesis` or so?
================
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:882
@@ -876,1 +881,3 @@
State.Stack.back().NestedBlockIndent);
+ bool NoLineBreak = State.Stack.back().NoLineBreak ||
+ (Current.is(TT_TemplateOpener) &&
----------------
Maybe add a comment on how this works? It's not clear to me. Is this change
(with the assignment below) to allow breaks in block-style literals?
================
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:983
@@ -976,2 +982,3 @@
State.Stack.back().LastSpace, /*AvoidBinPacking=*/true,
- State.Stack.back().NoLineBreak));
+ false));
+ // State.Stack.back().NoLineBreak));
----------------
Nit: add a comment on what the parameter is? `/*NoLineBreak*/ false`? And maybe
explain why code below needs this to be false?
================
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:984
@@ -978,1 +983,3 @@
+ false));
+ // State.Stack.back().NoLineBreak));
State.Stack.back().NestedBlockIndent = NestedBlockIndent;
----------------
Nit: leftover comment?
================
Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:393
@@ -392,6 +392,3 @@
void updateParameterCount(FormatToken *Left, FormatToken *Current) {
- if (Current->is(TT_LambdaLSquare) ||
- (Current->is(tok::caret) && Current->is(TT_UnaryOperator)) ||
- (Style.Language == FormatStyle::LK_JavaScript &&
- Current->is(Keywords.kw_function))) {
+ if (Current->is(tok::l_brace) && !Current->is(TT_DictLiteral))
++Left->BlockParameterCount;
----------------
I don't understand why this changes how we count block parameters - is this an
unrelated cleanup?
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/FormatTestJS.cpp:296
@@ -294,8 +295,3 @@
"]);");
- verifyFormat("var someVariable = SomeFuntion(aaaa,\n"
- " [\n"
- "
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,\n"
- "
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb,\n"
- " ccccccccccccccccccccccccccc\n"
- " ],\n"
- " aaaa);");
+ verifyFormat("var someVariable = SomeFuntion(\n"
+ " aaaa,\n"
----------------
nit: typo in `SomeFunction`
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/FormatTestJS.cpp:325
@@ -322,9 +324,3 @@
"};");
- EXPECT_EQ("abc = xyz ?\n"
- " function() {\n"
- " return 1;\n"
- " } :\n"
- " function() {\n"
- " return -1;\n"
- " };",
- format("abc=xyz?function(){return 1;}:function(){return -1;};"));
+ verifyFormat("abc = xyz ? function() {\n"
+ " return 1;\n"
----------------
This formatting is ok, I guess (and hopefully not too common in the first
place), but I find it somewhat surprising that this is a side effect of this
change. Can you explain?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D14104
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
