[PATCH] D92753: [clang-format] Add IndentPragma style to eliminate common clang-format off scenario

[Nathan James via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

njames93 added a comment.

Should this be controlled on a case by case basis, maybe control indentation using a regex over the pragma arguments, WDYT?



================
Comment at: clang/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.rst:1923-1924
+
+  When ``false``, pragmas are flushed left or follow IndentPPDirectives
+  When ``true``, pragmas are indented to the current scope level
+
----------------
Please add full stops at the end of these sentences.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.rst:1928
+
+    false:                       vs         false:
+
----------------



================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Format/Format.h:1533-1534
+  ///
+  /// When ``false``, pragmas are flushed left or follow IndentPPDirectives
+  /// When ``true``, pragmas are indented to the current scope level
+  /// \code
----------------
Please add full stops at the end of these sentences.


================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Format/Format.h:1536
+  /// \code
+  ///   false:                       vs         false:
+  ///
----------------



================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:594
+        State.Line->First->startsSequence(tok::hash, tok::pp_pragma);
+    // If indenting pragmas remove the extra space for the #
+    if (Style.IndentPragmas && isPragmaLine) {
----------------
Full stop.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:595-597
+    if (Style.IndentPragmas && isPragmaLine) {
+      Spaces--;
+    }
----------------
Can elide these braces.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineFormatter.cpp:1248
+    case FormatStyle::PPDIS_BeforeHash: {
+      // if we want to indent pragmas
+      bool isPragmaLine = RootToken.startsSequence(tok::hash, tok::pp_pragma);
----------------
Capital letter at the start of comments.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D92753/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D92753