[PATCH] Added LanguageStandard::LS_JavaScript to gate all JS-specific parsing.

[Daniel Jasper]

Yes. A style option makes perfect sense. I am just (moderately) against
implementing a filename-based detection in ClangFormat.cpp.


On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:
>
>> I think JS and C++ will almost always be in different sub-directories. So
>> different .clang-format files are the way to go..
>>
>
> That would be an argument for putting it in as a style option, right?
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:38 PM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>   After thinking some more, I guess my main reason is that I strongly
>>>> doubt
>>>>   that we'll ever have a JavaScript style and a C++ style that are
>>>> identical
>>>>   in all aspects other than the LanguageStandard.. So, the detection
>>>> based on
>>>>   the file extension inside clang-format will likely be redundant..
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think this would be useful for mixed open source projects (or
>>> companies without an existing style guide).
>>>  One interesting point is that our configuration is very "repo" centric,
>>> and there are enough mixed repos out there - how would we want to support
>>> this without major setup effort required for every engineer contributing to
>>> a project...
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20131121/93b31f3b/attachment.html>