[PATCH] D117520: [clang-format] Fix SeparateDefinitionBlocks issues

Björn Schäpers via Phabricator via cfe-commits cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jan 21 12:15:37 PST 2022

HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.

Comment at: clang/lib/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparator.cpp:134
+          OperateIndex + 1 < Lines.size()) {
+        // UnwrappedLineParser's recognition of free-standing macro like
+        // Q_OBJECT may also recognize some uppercased type names that may be
curdeius wrote:
> ksyx wrote:
> > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > Shouldn't we set a type for such cases instead of repeating the detection code here?
> > Here I actually did a few more checks to limit the impact to the minimum but I am happy to do that if that's necessary.
> > Shouldn't we set a type for such cases instead of repeating the detection code here?
> :+1:
Thanks! Shouldn't we drop are radically change this comment?

Comment at: clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp:1686
+      FormatToken *LastToken = FormatTok;
This is more consistent with the rest of the code base.

Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparatorTest.cpp:47
                             llvm::StringRef ExpectedCode = "") {
     ::testing::ScopedTrace t(File, Line, ::testing::Message() << Code.str());
     bool HasOriginalCode = true;
This is from Debugging?

Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparatorTest.cpp:143
+              "\n"
+              "  LONGTYPENAME\n"
+              "  Foobar(int t, int p) {\n"
ksyx wrote:
> HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > Maybe really use HRESULT? People will know what that should be.
> It actually does not matter what type name it is as long as it is an identifier with >=5 characters and all uppercased
That I know, but HRESULT would look familiar to at least some people.



More information about the cfe-commits mailing list