jp4a50 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:333
+ // enabled.
+ !(Current.is(TT_LambdaLBrace) && Style.BraceWrapping.BeforeLambdaBody) &&
CurrentState.NoLineBreakInOperand) {
----------------
AFAICT, this only matters when using `OuterScope`, but it seems like a sensible
exception to make in the general case, so I haven't included a check for
`OuterScope` here.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:1040
+ //
+ // We specifically special case "OuterScope"-formatted lambdas here
+ // because, when using that setting, breaking before the parameter
----------------
So I genuinely think that the original implementation here (which I've left
intact *except* for when OuterScope is enabled) does not match up to the
intention expressed in the comment in line 1018.
It effectively seems to assume that the parenthesis level entry which is second
from the top is the 'parent' parenthesis level, but this ignores the fact that
there are often "fake parens" entries in the parenthesis state stack which
presumably should be ignored (as I have done in my implementation for
OuterScope).
As such, there are a lot of cases where (when OuterScope is not enabled) we
apply `BreakBeforeParameter` to the *existing* parenthesis level rather than
the parent parenthesis level. So when I tried to "fix" this behaviour in the
general case it broke a lot of tests, even though I think the behaviour may be
what was originally intended.
Happy to discuss this and be proven wrong, but I thought I'd explain why I've
added a special case here for OuterScope in even greater detail than I have in
the comment.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148131/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148131
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
