klimek added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33589#941979, @Typz wrote:
> I think the difference between code and comments is that code "words" are
> easily 10 characters or more, whereas actual words (in comments) are very
> often less than 10 characters: so code overflowing by 10 characters is not
> very frequent. whereas small words in comment will often get closer to the
> "extra" limit.
>
> That said, I tried with your latest change ("Restructure how we break
> tokens", sha1:64d42a2fb85ece5987111ffb908c6bc7f7431dd4). and it's working
> about fine now. For the most part it seems to wrap when I would expect it,
> great work!
> I have seen 2 "issues" though:
>
> - Often I see that the last word before reflowing is not wrapped (eventhough
> it overlaps the line length); I did not count penalties so I cannot confirm
> this is really an issue or just a borderline scenario.
> - Alignment seems better than before, but since there is no penalty for
> breaking alignment it will always try to unindent to compensate for
> overflowing characters...
>
> Seeing this, I guess this patch does not make much sense anymore, I'll see
> if I make some improvements for these two issues, in separate patches.
Note that I just 10 mins ago landed another change (r319541) that should fix
the main issue you raised, and which looks a lot like I wanted this change to
look back when I first saw it (but of course all the underlying code made that
impossible). Please give it a try and let me know what you think.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D33589
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
