forked from OSchip/llvm-project
Fixes detection of class template specializations.
Now correctly formats: template <> class A<int> {} a; llvm-svn: 173038
This commit is contained in:
parent
5f37c82154
commit
cdee74db63
|
@ -620,7 +620,17 @@ void UnwrappedLineParser::parseRecord() {
|
|||
FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::coloncolon))
|
||||
nextToken();
|
||||
|
||||
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::colon)) {
|
||||
// Note that parsing away template declarations here leads to incorrectly
|
||||
// accepting function declarations as record declarations.
|
||||
// In general, we cannot solve this problem. Consider:
|
||||
// class A<int> B() {}
|
||||
// which can be a function definition or a class definition when B() is a
|
||||
// macro. If we find enough real-world cases where this is a problem, we
|
||||
// can parse for the 'template' keyword in the beginning of the statement,
|
||||
// and thus rule out the record production in case there is no template
|
||||
// (this would still leave us with an ambiguity between template function
|
||||
// and class declarations).
|
||||
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::colon) || FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::less)) {
|
||||
while (FormatTok.Tok.isNot(tok::l_brace)) {
|
||||
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::semi))
|
||||
return;
|
||||
|
@ -630,6 +640,9 @@ void UnwrappedLineParser::parseRecord() {
|
|||
}
|
||||
if (FormatTok.Tok.is(tok::l_brace))
|
||||
parseBlock();
|
||||
// We fall through to parsing a structural element afterwards, so
|
||||
// class A {} n, m;
|
||||
// will end up in one unwrapped line.
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void UnwrappedLineParser::parseObjCProtocolList() {
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1530,6 +1530,14 @@ TEST_F(FormatTest, UnderstandContextOfRecordTypeKeywords) {
|
|||
// Redefinition from nested context:
|
||||
verifyFormat("class A::B::C {} n;");
|
||||
|
||||
// Template definitions.
|
||||
// FIXME: This is still incorrectly handled at the formatter side.
|
||||
verifyFormat("template <> struct X < 15, i < 3 && 42 < 50 && 33<28> {};");
|
||||
|
||||
// FIXME:
|
||||
// This now gets parsed incorrectly as class definition.
|
||||
// verifyFormat("class A<int> f() {}\nint n;");
|
||||
|
||||
// Elaborate types where incorrectly parsing the structural element would
|
||||
// break the indent.
|
||||
verifyFormat("if (true)\n"
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue