MyDeveloperDay added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Format/Format.h:1220
+ /// \endcode
+ bool AfterCSharpProperty;
};
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > Please sort. :)
> > Are we sure we want THIS to be alphabetic, as this changes the initializer
> > order, if someone is using the format() library in downstream code this
> > could subtly break them?
> >
> > ```
> > Expanded.BraceWrapping = {/*AfterCaseLabel=*/false,
> > /*AfterClass=*/false,
> >
> > /*AfterControlStatement=*/FormatStyle::BWACS_Never,
> > /*AfterEnum=*/false,
> > /*AfterFunction=*/false,
> > /*AfterNamespace=*/false,
> > /*AfterObjCDeclaration=*/false,
> > /*AfterStruct=*/false,
> > /*AfterUnion=*/false,
> > /*AfterExternBlock=*/false,
> > /*BeforeCatch=*/false,
> > /*BeforeElse=*/false,
> > /*BeforeLambdaBody=*/false,
> > /*BeforeWhile=*/false,
> > /*IndentBraces=*/false,
> > /*SplitEmptyFunction=*/true,
> > /*SplitEmptyRecord=*/true,
> > /*SplitEmptyNamespace=*/true,
> > /*AfterCSharpProperty=*/false};
> > ```
> I'd say yes, we are breaking this stuff always.
>
> Granted this one may compile without an error, but they should get a warning
> of a missing initializer.
>
> You could add a constructor to initialize out of struct order.
I'm ok with making the change, just wanted to double check that we are ok to
break the ordering.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148467/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D148467
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
