[PATCH] D127873: [clang-format] Fix misplacemnt of `*` in declaration of pointer to struct

[Björn Schäpers via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:2314-2315
+    if (PrevToken->is(tok::r_brace) && Tok.isOneOf(tok::amp, tok::ampamp) &&
+        PrevToken->MatchingParen && PrevToken->MatchingParen->is(TT_Unknown))
+      return TT_BinaryOperator;
+
----------------
jackhong12 wrote:
> jackhong12 wrote:
> > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > Unknown is everything, until some type is assigned. This way it should be clearer.
> > > 
> > > Also put that check above the other one and add the `r_brace` back.
> > There are other problems. Clang-format will split the input into multiple lines first. For instance, `struct {\n int n;\n} &&ptr={};` will be separated as `struct {`, `int n;` and `} &&ptr={};`. It only handles the relation in the line. When declaring a struct variable, the value of `MatchingParen` will always be NULL instead of pointing to the last left brace. So it will not enter that branch in this case.
> ```
> if (PrevToken->is(tok::r_brace) && Tok.isOneOf(tok::amp, tok::ampamp) &&
>     PrevToken->MatchingParen) {
>   if (PrevToken->MatchingParen->is(TT_RecordLBrace))
>     return TT_PointerOrReference;
>   else
>     return TT_BinaryOperator;
> }
> ```
> How about this way? Although the branch of TT_PointerOrReference will not be taken, it's clearer for reading.
Then I think I would prefer a comment which explains the logic instead of adding dead (and thus untested) code.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D127873/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D127873