[PATCH] D143546: [clang-format] Insert a space between a numeric UDL and a dot

[Owen Pan via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

owenpan marked an inline comment as done.
owenpan added a comment.

In D143546#4116196 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546#4116196>, @HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:

> In D143546#4114341 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546#4114341>, @owenpan wrote:
>
>> In D143546#4113721 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546#4113721>, @rymiel wrote:
>>
>>> In D143546#4112077 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546#4112077>, @owenpan wrote:
>>>
>>>> As this one is an invalid-code-generation bug, I wanted it fixed ASAP.
>>>
>>> Do you intend to backport it to the 16 release branch then?
>>
>> I don't know but will go with whatever you, @MyDeveloperDay and @HazardyKnusperkeks prefer.
>
> I'd vote in favor, letting a code breaking bug knowingly in the most current (or to come? I don't follow that.) version would be let's say not nice.

+1.



================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:3884
   if (Style.isCpp()) {
+    if (Right.is(tok::period) && Left.is(tok::numeric_constant))
+      return true;
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> owenpan wrote:
> > rsmith wrote:
> > > owenpan wrote:
> > > > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > > > Add a comment what that is? Without the bug report I'd not know what that sequence would be.
> > > > I could do that, but the github issue is linked in the summary above and will be in the commit message. In general, I don't like unnecessary comments littered in the source. They can become outdated, out of place, misleading, and even wrong. How about giving an example as shown above?
> > > Does `clang-format` have any formatting modes where it would leave out spaces around `+` or `-`? The same issue arises with things like `0xe + n`, where removing the space between the `0xe` and the `+` results in a token splice.
> > No. I was aware of them and had made sure clang-format already handled them correctly.
> > I could do that, but the github issue is linked in the summary above and will be in the commit message. In general, I don't like unnecessary comments littered in the source. They can become outdated, out of place, misleading, and even wrong. How about giving an example as shown above?
> 
> If you do a `git blame` you can come to the commit and thus to the bug, but if you are just reading, at least I don't blame all the lines. There I think a comment is nice, and your proposal is a really nice one.
> But I've accepted the patch as is, and so the decision is yours. :)
+1.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D143546