Backl1ght added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:169-171
+ CurrentToken->getStartOfNonWhitespace() ==
+ CurrentToken->Next->getStartOfNonWhitespace().getLocWithOffset(
+ -1)) {
----------------
MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> I was wondering this is actually saying....
>
> I think its saying... 2 tokens are next to each other ">>" its not so much
> formatting but ensuring the existing formatting is maintained, is that what
> you understand?
>
> Whilst this works it won't correct the case where the whitespace is wrong
>
> i.e. I don't think
>
> ```
> if (std::tuple_size_v < T >> 0) {
> }
> ```
>
> will be corrected to be
>
> ```
> if (std::tuple_size_v<T> > 0) {
> }
> ```
>
> I'm a little wary of rules that use the existing whitespace, but I tend to
> agree that it might be ok without the extra check.
>
> It would be good to capture this as an annotator test (I like the
> verifyformat one you put in) but the annotator tests we can assert that its
> actually a templatecloser and binary operatror
>
>
>
I think there should be more infomation to make the correction.
So far, we only know that `tuple_size_v` is an identifier, but the exact type
of `tuple_size_v` is unknown. Maybe `tuple_size_v` is a type trait and in this
case we should make the correction. Maybe `tuple_size_v` is an interger and in
this case we should not make the correction.
To make the correction, we need at least one of:
1. is `tuple_size_v` a type trait?
2. is `T` a typename?
3. is `>>` a right shift?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140843/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D140843
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
