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
