Allow for nested name specifiers in record declarations.

Now correctly formats:
class A::B {} n;

llvm-svn: 173019
This commit is contained in:
Manuel Klimek 2013-01-21 10:17:14 +00:00
parent c4352ec26a
commit 3c6b7c7d71
2 changed files with 8 additions and 2 deletions

View File

@ -615,7 +615,9 @@ void UnwrappedLineParser::parseRecord() {
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::l_paren)) {
parseParens();
}
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::identifier))
// The actual identifier can be a nested name specifier.
while (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::identifier) ||
FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::coloncolon))
nextToken();
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::colon)) {

View File

@ -1519,13 +1519,17 @@ TEST_F(FormatTest, UnderstandContextOfRecordTypeKeywords) {
// Actual definitions...
verifyFormat("struct {} n;");
verifyFormat("template <template <class T, class Y>, class Z > class X {} n;");
verifyFormat(
"template <template <class T, class Y>, class Z > class X {} n;");
verifyFormat("union Z {\n int n;\n} x;");
verifyFormat("class MACRO Z {} n;");
verifyFormat("class MACRO(X) Z {} n;");
verifyFormat("class __attribute__(X) Z {} n;");
verifyFormat("class __declspec(X) Z {} n;");
// Redefinition from nested context:
verifyFormat("class A::B::C {} n;");
// Elaborate types where incorrectly parsing the structural element would
// break the indent.
verifyFormat("if (true)\n"