[cfe-dev] Clang-format: Braces Indent Style Whitesmiths

[Daniel Jasper]

Yeah. Enums are special. The reason is that we want to treat them somewhat
close to other braced lists. They do not really contain individual
statements or declarations and thus we parse them into a single unwrapped
line. The actual wrapping/indentation is then done later in
ContinuationIndenter.cpp. The logic might be a bit convoluted there, let me
know if you need further help

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 4:14 PM, JVApen <JVApen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> Most of appears to be working with the Whitesmiths; however I still have
> one group of tests failing.
> These tests contain enumerations, the scenario is the following:
>
> enum X
>   {
>   Y = 0
>   }
>
> which gets formatted to:
>
> enum X
> {
>   Y = 0
> }
>
> If I call addUnwrappedLine() at the end of parseEnum() the result becomes
> the following:
>
> enum X
>   {
>     Y = 0
>   }
>
> The debug information tells me the following:
> Line(0): enum[47] identifier[47]
> Line(1): l_brace[47] identifier[47] equal[47] numeric_constant[47]
> r_brace[47]
> Line(0): eof[47]
>
> Hower for this result I expect it to be more like:
> Line(0): enum[47] identifier[47]
> Line(1): l_brace[47]
> Line(2): identifier[47] equal[47] numeric_constant[47]
> Line(1): r_brace[47]
> Line(0): eof[47]
>
> However I'm guessing that I am missing something obvious;
> I do however suspect parseBracedList() from doing something which I don't
> completely understand
> OR something in the UnwrappedLineFormatter.cpp file to mess this up.
>
> Any idea on where to look for the responsible?
>
> ​JVApen​
>
>
> On 26 December 2014 at 20:14, Daniel Jasper <djasper at google.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 7:53 PM, JVApen <JVApen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I was looking into the clang tools to experiment with; hoping to
>>> convince some colleagues that tooling can save us time.
>>> Anyhow; since I was trying to take baby steps; clang format looked like
>>> a very good start.
>>> Unfortunately, we would not be programmers if we wouldn't do things a
>>> bit different than the rest of the world.
>>>
>>> The current code; with too many files; uses the Whitesmiths style
>>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indent_style#Whitesmiths_style> at most
>>> places.
>>> Though this is not yet supported by clang format.
>>> Going through the code, adding support for it did not look like a big
>>> thing; since Allman and GNU are very similar.
>>> The thing I did not realize is that both of them indent all code by one
>>> level compared to the {,
>>> which is not done by Whitesmiths style.
>>>
>>
>> That actually shouldn't matter much. The whether or not to break before
>> the "{" is controlled by calling addUnwrappedLine() one more time whereas
>> the indentation is controlled by changing Line->Level. Basically all you
>> should need to do is to change the order of "addUnwrappedLine();
>> ++Line->Level;" for the addUnwrappedLine() call for the "{". Unfortunately,
>> there is no nice abstraction for this and you'll need to look at how to do
>> this for the different kinds of syntactic elements individually. I can look
>> into it and give more help if you get stuck.
>>
>> I already wrote a unit test, based on the Allman unit test; useful for
>>> test driven development
>>> and experimented already with the code in
>>> lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
>>> Though can't seem to find out how to prevent the extra indent;
>>> does anyone with more codebase experience have an idea where to start?
>>>
>>> JVApen
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20150101/1f63b95b/attachment.html>