owenca wrote: > > The `TT_PointerOrReference` token (`*`, `&`, or `&&`) before a declarator > > is part of the type and should not go with the declarator, so wrapping > > before `*` doesn't make sense IMO.
The "`TT_PointerOrReference` token (`*`, `&`, or `&&`) before a declarator" part meant something like `int * foo;` in my mind, and breaking after the `*` makes more sense to me. > > I'd say break before `*` because `const` qualifies it. Yes, I'd break before the `*` instead of after it. (You can't break after the `const` because of the column limit.) > Do I get it right? The program should prefer breaking after the `*const` part > and fall back to breaking before the `*const` part when the former violates > the column limit, regardless of the PAS configuration. If the column limit permits, I have no opinion on whether to break before the `*` or after the `const` because the `*` is not (immediately) before the declarator. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/164686 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
