owenpan added a comment.
Now that we look ahead instead of looking back, it doesn't matter what comes
before `*[]` or `[]`.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:3342
+ "public:\n"
+ " std::unique_ptr<int *[]> b() { return nullptr; }\n"
+ "\n"
----------------
curdeius wrote:
> How about `int const *`, `const int*`? Is `const` & co. a simple type
> specifier?
It doesn't matter what comes before `*[]` now that we look ahead for a `>`.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124589/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D124589
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
