djasper accepted this revision.
djasper added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Some remarks, but looks good.
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/CleanupTest.cpp:38
@@ +37,3 @@
+ // Returns code after cleanup around \p Offsets.
+ std::string cleanupAroundOffsets(llvm::ArrayRef<unsigned int> Offsets,
+ llvm::StringRef Code) {
----------------
I thin we normally just used "unsigned" instead of "unsigned int".
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/CleanupTest.cpp:39
@@ +38,3 @@
+ std::string cleanupAroundOffsets(llvm::ArrayRef<unsigned int> Offsets,
+ llvm::StringRef Code) {
+ std::vector<tooling::Range> Ranges;
----------------
nit: alignment.
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/CleanupTest.cpp:125
@@ -123,7 +124,3 @@
std::string Expected = "class A {\nA() {} };";
- std::vector<tooling::Range> Ranges;
- Ranges.push_back(tooling::Range(17, 0));
- Ranges.push_back(tooling::Range(19, 0));
- std::string Result = cleanup(Code, Ranges);
- EXPECT_EQ(Expected, Result);
+ EXPECT_EQ(Expected, cleanupAroundOffsets({17, 19}, Code));
----------------
I think for such short test cases, at least, I'd just inline the string
literals, e.g.:
EXPECT_EQ("class A {\nA() {} };",
cleanupAroundOffsets({17, 19}, "class A {\nA() : , {} };"));
But not sure whether it's better.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24501
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
