[cfe-dev] clang-format: inconsistency in function arg layout (C++)

[Jonas Toth via cfe-dev]

Hi Oleg,

could you please send that patch to `reviews.llvm.org`. That makes it
easier to review and discuss on the code.

Best, Jonas


Am 10.09.2018 um 22:47 schrieb Oleg Smolsky via cfe-dev:
> OK, the functionality is a special case introduced in 2014 here:
> 8228889b01404d7e59270b1f97a83977531a7748.
>
> The minimal hack is to check for the preceding comma... but that
> breaks some "literal" cases... So, I need to make these selections
> even more particular (to either exclude literals or only include
> lambdas). Does this sound right?
>
> On 2018-09-10 12:47, Oleg Smolsky wrote:
>> Hi, I've just boiled down an interesting C++ lambda formatting trait
>> and would like to clarify the tool's behavior. Consider the following
>> snippet (please view with a fixed-width font):
>>
>> void f() {
>>   something->One(
>>       [this] {
>>         Do1();
>>         Do2();
>>       },
>>       1);
>>   something->Two(1,
>>                  [this] {
>>                    Do1();
>>                    Do2();
>>                  },
>>                  1);
>> }
>>
>> There is an inconsistency in the way lambda args are formatted,
>> depending on whether it is first (the "One()" call above) or not (the
>> "Two()" call above). Is there some internal guide that the tool uses
>> to decide between the two layouts? Or is it just an artifact of the
>> implementation?
>>
>> More generally, would you entertain a patch that forces the format
>> one way or another? (Perhaps even with a user-defined setting?)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Oleg.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180911/3d1171d8/attachment.html>