[cfe-dev] break after definition return type, but only if function can't be a one-liner?

[Adam McKee]

It does make sense to me that it's impractical to have clang-format support
all the formatting styles people like.  I think if I was maintaining this
program, I'd want a stronger justification for increasing the number of
configuration parameters than I would for making an existing parameter able
to better co-operate with another existing parameter.

I haven't looked at the source for clang-format yet, but I don't rule out
having a go at making a patch.  If I do that I'll surely send it to you, to
get your feedback.

Anyhow, Happy New Year!


On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:

> As for the option: It has never been the intention of clang-format to
> support any style that someone somewhere has come up with. We'd rather
> support a limited set of established styles really well. You could probably
> make an argument that we have already lost that war, looking at the number
> of options that clang-format already has. However, we still have the
> general rule that we'd rather introduce options only for stuff that is used
> in big (ideally open-source) projects or publicly available style guides.
> Now again, I don't think this option will have a terribly high maintenance
> effort, but it is also not trivial. At least until we are able to pull out
> a better abstraction for "do this if stuff fits/doesn't fit on one line". I
> still haven't made up my mind. Are you willing to prepare a patch showing
> what this would actually look like?
>
> As for a plugin mechanism: I have not come up with a good way to do this
> yet. Especially, I have so far failed to see what the right level of
> abstraction would be here. Basically every single of such options requires
> manipulating a separate set of things. And I am also unsure whether this
> solves anything. Somebody writing such a plugin will still file the same
> bugs if we change a different part of clang-format breaking the plugin's
> behavior. And then we are in pretty much the same situation except that we
> might not have the test cases we need and no good way to reproduce the
> behavior.
>
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 4:19 PM, mobi phil <mobi at mobiphil.com> wrote:
>
>> first, hope that everybody is having a lovely Xmass time.
>>
>> it is on my todo list to hack the clang-format tool. Wonder if there is
>> some plugin mechanism in place (or if not, why not think about), that would
>> accommodate situations presentend by the original poster. It is in my
>> opinion a healthy middle way. I think once one would discover the power of
>> the tool, would find tons of ways and reasons to deviate from the existing
>> bit limited range of options.
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20141231/b6c3c962/attachment.html>