[llvm-bugs] [Bug 32969] New: clang-format breaks array initializer in unexpected places
via llvm-bugs
llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org
Mon May 8 10:01:26 PDT 2017
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=32969
Bug ID: 32969
Summary: clang-format breaks array initializer in unexpected
places
Product: clang
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Formatter
Assignee: unassignedclangbugs at nondot.org
Reporter: lukasza at chromium.org
CC: djasper at google.com, klimek at google.com,
llvm-bugs at lists.llvm.org
Given the following (manually formatted) snippet...
bool IsBlacklistedInstanceMethodName(llvm::StringRef name) {
static const char* kBlacklistedNames[] = {
// We should avoid renaming the method names listed below, because
// 1. They are used in templated code (e.g. in <algorithms>)
// 2. They (begin+end) are used in range-based for syntax sugar
// - for (auto x : foo) { ... } // <- foo.begin() will be called.
"begin", "end", "rbegin", "rend", "lock", "unlock", "try_lock",
// https://crbug.com/672902: Should not rewrite names that mimick methods
// from std library.
"at", "back", "clear" "empty", "erase", "find", "front", "insert",
"length", "size", "swap",
};
for (const auto& b : kBlacklistedNames) {
if (name == b)
return true;
}
return false;
}
clang-format reformats it to:
bool IsBlacklistedInstanceMethodName(llvm::StringRef name) {
static const char* kBlacklistedNames[] = {
// We should avoid renaming the method names listed below, because
// 1. They are used in templated code (e.g. in <algorithms>)
// 2. They (begin+end) are used in range-based for syntax sugar
// - for (auto x : foo) { ... } // <- foo.begin() will be called.
"begin", "end", "rbegin", "rend", "lock", "unlock", "try_lock",
// https://crbug.com/672902: Should not rewrite names that mimick methods
// from std library.
"at", "back",
"clear"
"empty",
"erase", "find", "front", "insert", "length", "size", "swap",
};
for (const auto& b : kBlacklistedNames) {
if (name == b)
return true;
}
return false;
}
I am rather surprised that 1) any reformatting is needed at all, 2) that
results take more lines than the original formatting, 3) that the line breaks
seem randomly placed (e.g. *why* after "back", and "clear" and "empty", but not
after "at" or "erase").
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-bugs/attachments/20170508/fab43ce8/attachment.html>
More information about the llvm-bugs
mailing list