github-actions[bot] wrote:
<!--LLVM CODE FORMAT COMMENT: {clang-format}-->
:warning: C/C++ code formatter, clang-format found issues in your code.
:warning:
<details>
<summary>
You can test this locally with the following command:
</summary>
``````````bash
git-clang-format --diff origin/main HEAD --extensions cpp --
clang/lib/AST/ExprClassification.cpp
clang/test/SemaTemplate/temp_arg_template.cpp
``````````
:warning:
The reproduction instructions above might return results for more than one PR
in a stack if you are using a stacked PR workflow. You can limit the results by
changing `origin/main` to the base branch/commit you want to compare against.
:warning:
</details>
<details>
<summary>
View the diff from clang-format here.
</summary>
``````````diff
diff --git a/clang/lib/AST/ExprClassification.cpp
b/clang/lib/AST/ExprClassification.cpp
index efe721376..aeacd0dc7 100644
--- a/clang/lib/AST/ExprClassification.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/AST/ExprClassification.cpp
@@ -602,9 +602,9 @@ static Cl::Kinds ClassifyBinaryOp(ASTContext &Ctx, const
BinaryOperator *E) {
assert(Ctx.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus &&
"This is only relevant for C++.");
- // For binary operators which are unknown due to type dependence, the
convention
- // is to classify them as a prvalue. This does not matter much, but it needs
- // to agree with how they are created.
+ // For binary operators which are unknown due to type dependence, the
+ // convention is to classify them as a prvalue. This does not matter much,
but
+ // it needs to agree with how they are created.
if (E->getType() == Ctx.DependentTy)
return Cl::CL_PRValue;
``````````
</details>
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/159819
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
