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

[Manuel Klimek]

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?

Cheers,
/Manuel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20121218/5baee3df/attachment.html>