[cfe-commits] clang formatter patch to move and rename RewriterTestContext.h

[Manuel Klimek]

On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 11:31 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> [Re-adding cfe-commits]
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2012, at 1:09 AM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 17, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Fariborz,
>>>>
>>>> I am taking a look at your patch, but please bear with me for another
>>>> day or two. I am not yet convinced that mingling C++ and ObjC formatting
>>>> that closely is a wise decision. I think we might need something that
>>>> clearly separates the different modes. And you touch a lot of code that I
>>>> intended to refactor into something halfway sane this week. I will take
>>>> your patch into consideration when doing so, but it might need some changes
>>>> afterwards.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If we're going to distinguish the modes, we need to do so
>>>> syntactically. Objective-C++ is a very popular dialect; we can't simply
>>>> rely on extrinsic knowledge of whether we're dealing with Objective-C or
>>>> C++ to make these decisions.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure I fully understand this. We are currently relying on a
>>> Lexer which in turn requires LangOptions to create the correct tokens. Same
>>> for the identifier table we use to split raw_identifiers into identifiers
>>> and keywords. Are you saying the formatter should not capitalize on this
>>> knowledge of the input token stream?
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, it should certainly capitalize on this knowledge. My concern is
>>> that, when you mentioned that we might need something that "clearly
>>> separates the different modes", you were thinking of Objective-C and C++ as
>>> independent languages that aren't used together. Fortunately, we can tell
>>> syntactically whether we're in an Objective-C method declaration fairly
>>> easily: they start with + or -, almost always in the first column, so if it
>>> would be better to go down a different code-formatting path where the rules
>>> for spacing around (/)/: are different, we could do that instead.
>>>
>>> - Doug
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, "clearly separate" was probably stronger phrased than intended. One
>> of the things I wonder is the following:
>> If we are not in Objective-C according to the LangOptions and we discover
>> a + or - at the beginning of a "line", should we assume an error has
>> happened (e.g. forgotten "}" or ";") or try to format as an Objective-C
>> declaration?
>>
>>
>> I think we should assume that an error has occurred. If clients don't
>> know the language dialect, they should pick something maximally inclusive
>> (e.g., Objective-C++11).
>>
>
> For files, I assume it's easy enough to detect by the file extension?
>
>
> And .h means what, exactly?
>

I assume with that comment you're telling me it's used for Objective-C,
too? :) Reading up the wikipedia page suggests so ...

How different is Objective-C usually layed out? Will we need a
configuration to tell us which files in a project are which language, or
will we get away with auto-detection? I assume auto-detection is hard as
there will be keywords that have special layout rules in both languages?

Cheers,
/Manuel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20121218/6f7fae29/attachment.html>