jaredgrubb added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:5473
+ if (Right.isOneOf(tok::kw___attribute, TT_AttributeMacro))
+ return true;
+
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> Does changing this return value make no difference? In other words is there
> no combination of `Left.is(TT_AttributeSquare)` and
> `Right.is(tok::kw___attribute)`?
Yes, that combo can happen; example below.
The patch that changed the left-diff line from `true` to
`!Left.is(TT_AttributeSquare)`
was done _only_ contemplating the `[[` case
(5a4ddbd69db2b0e09398214510501d0e59a0c30b); tagging @MyDeveloperDay who wrote
that patch and can perhaps offer more insight on your question.
My reasoning is to revert that part of the patch just a bit and limit it to
that case only.
I couldn't come up with a use-case where you'd want to avoid splitting between
`TT_AttributeSquare` and `kw___attribute`, but the example below shows that
allowing it to break in that combination is preferable to the alternative of
breaking in the parens of the attribute:
```
// Style: "{BasedOnStyle: LLVM, ColumnLimit: 40}"
// Existing Behavior
int ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff(
double)
__attribute__((overloadable))
[[unused]] __attribute__((
overloadable));
// With Patch
int ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff(
double)
__attribute__((overloadable))
[[unused]]
__attribute__((overloadable));
```
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145262/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D145262
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
