Hi Csaba, I can think of several possible results that look better (to me) than the current one:
int func() { aaaaaaaaaaa = bbbbbbbbbb->cccccccccc( SomeNamespace::Function(dddddddd?"eeeeeeee":"ffffffff")).gggggggggg(); } OR int func() { aaaaaaaaaaa = bbbbbbbbbb->cccccccccc( SomeNamespace::Function( dddddddd?"eeeeeeee":"ffffffff") ).gggggggggg(); } OR int func() { aaaaaaaaaaa = bbbbbbbbbb->cccccccccc(SomeNamespace::Function( dddddddd?"eeeeeeee":"ffffffff")).gggggggggg(); } In fact, pretty much anything that doesn't break the line at '->' works for me. This is not the case with the current clang-format, though. If you run clang-format (with any predefined style) for either of the aforementioned codes, it always breaks the line with '->', even if all lines satisfy the column limit. Thank you, Mikhail On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Csaba Raduly <rcs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mikhail, > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 11:44 PM, Mikhail Artemyev via cfe-users > <cfe-users@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I am currently trying to beatify a reasonably large code base, and I am > > quite surprised about how clang-format breaks long lines where there is a > > '->' operator. > > > > Example: > > % cat test.cpp > > int func() { > > aaaaaaaaaaa = bbbbbbbbbb->cccccccccc(SomeNamespace::Function( > dddddddd?"eeeeeeee":"ffffffff")).gggggggggg(); > > } > > > How would you like the result to look like? > > Csaba > > -- > GCS a+ e++ d- C++ ULS$ L+$ !E- W++ P+++$ w++$ tv+ b++ DI D++ 5++ > The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers. > Life is complex, with real and imaginary parts. > "Ok, it boots. Which means it must be bug-free and perfect. " -- Linus > Torvalds > "People disagree with me. I just ignore them." -- Linus Torvalds >
_______________________________________________ cfe-users mailing list cfe-users@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users