r236851 - clang-format: Several improvements around formatting braced lists.

[Daniel Jasper]

Fixed in r236992. Sorry if you have to change polly back..

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es> wrote:

> On 05/08/2015 05:18 PM, Daniel Jasper wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Tobias Grosser <tobias at grosser.es
>> <mailto:tobias at grosser.es>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 05/08/2015 03:51 PM, Daniel Jasper wrote:
>>
>>         Author: djasper
>>         Date: Fri May  8 08:51:14 2015
>>         New Revision: 236851
>>
>>         URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=236851&view=rev
>>         Log:
>>         clang-format: Several improvements around formatting braced lists.
>>
>>         In particular:
>>         * If the difference between the longest and shortest element, we
>>         copped
>>             out of column format completely. Now, we instead allow to
>>         arrange
>>             these in a single column, essentially enforcing a
>>         one-per-line format.
>>         * Allow column layout even if there are braced lists. Especially,
>> if
>>             there are many short lists, this can be beneficial. The bad
>>         case,
>>             where there is a long nested init list is usually caught as
>>         we now
>>             limit the length difference of the longest and shortest
>> element.
>>
>>
>>     Hi Daniel,
>>
>>     this change caused the following formatting change in Polly:
>>
>>     -  Value *Args[] = {SubFn, SubFnParam, NumberOfThreads, LB, UB,
>> Stride};
>>     +  Value *Args[] = {SubFn,
>>     +                   SubFnParam,
>>     +                   NumberOfThreads,
>>     +                   LB,
>>     +                   UB,
>>     +                   Stride};
>>
>>     I will change this in Polly. It might be useful to add some test case
>>     that shows that in certain cases we want to format a list in column
>>     layout even though it fits a single line.
>>
>>
>> Do we? Do you actually think the new format is better?
>>
>
> I personally would probably just have left the old formatting, but as this
> case does not happen that often and both are readable, I don't have any
> strong opinion on this.
>
> Though, I would like us to choose one formatting to which we will stick to
> in the future. Regarding which one to choose, feel free to take the one you
> like best.
>
> Best,
> Tobias
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20150511/0e6033e9/attachment.html>