owenpan added a comment.
In D95168#3102511 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D95168#3102511>, @MyDeveloperDay
wrote:
> Then this is definitely why we want to think about these now and NOT leave
> them to a separate review after the Insert case is committed.
We can just leave a placeholder for the RemoveBraces options and deal with them
when we get there. Unless I misunderstood, your suggestion of the
AutomaticBraces option (with `enum` values Insert, Remove, LLVM, etc) would
accomplish that.
> If we think remove braces would be a struct then we'd better go for a struct
> now and not later so there is some symmetry, I'm slightly wondering what
> would be in the struct?
I already had an implementation of RemoveBraces for the LLVM style (minus some
exceptions). I started with an `enum` to accommodate different levels of
aggressiveness of removal with LLVM at the minimum end. After looking at
several prominent styles, I realized that a `struct` would work better.
> 1. Do we want to remove {} from an else or elseif when the if needs braces
>
> if (x==1) {
> foo();
> bar();
> }
> else if (x==2)
> baz();
> else
> foo();
>
> 2. Do we want to remove braces from a commented if (this can throw your eye
> out when looking)
>
> if (x==1)
> // some longish comment
> return x;
>
> 3. Do we want sub scope to be removed of braces too?
>
> if (x==1)
> for (int i=0;i<10;i++)
> foo();
>
> 4. Do we want to prevent the remove for MultiLine scope, where what follows
> would be spread over multiple lines (a little like the comment really)
>
> if (x== 1)
> os << "This is a very very very long"
> << data
> << "More data"
> << "endl;"
> `
I've seen both yes and no for all the above.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95168/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D95168
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
