Before:
bool aaaa = aaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
After:
bool aaaa = aaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
The other indentation was a nice attempt but doesn't work in many cases.
Not sure what the right long term solution is as the "After: " is still
not nice. We either need to figure out what to do in the cases where it
"doesn't work" or come up with a third solution, e.g. falling back to:
bool aaaa =
aaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
which should always work and nicely highlight the structure.
llvm-svn: 173268
Layouting would prevent breaking before + in
a[b + c] = d;
Regression detected by code review.
Also fixes an invalid-read found by the valgrind bot.
llvm-svn: 173262
Having seen more cases, this actually was not a good thing to do in the
first place. We can still improve on what we do now, but breaking after
the "=" is good in many cases.
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaa = aa->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaa =
aa->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
llvm-svn: 173257
Before: if (int * a = &b) ...
After: if (int *a = &b) ...
Also changed all the existing tests to test the expressions in question
both in a declaration and in an expression context.
llvm-svn: 173256
We will need a more principled solution, but we should not leave this
unfixed until we come up with one.
Before: void f() { int * a; }
After: void f() { int *a; }
llvm-svn: 173252
This only affects styles where BinPackParameters is false.
With AllowAllParametersOnNextLine:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaa);
Without it:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaa);
llvm-svn: 173246
This gives us the ability to guess better defaults for whether a *
between identifiers is a pointer dereference or binary operator.
Now correctly formats:
void f(a *b);
void f() { f(a * b); }
llvm-svn: 173243
Collections of attributes are handled via the AttributeSet class now. This
finally frees us up to make significant changes to how attributes are structured.
llvm-svn: 173229
* Fix a typo, s/BeginSourceAction/BeginSourceFile/, so that the documentation
for FrontendAction::BeginSourceFileAction links correctly to BeginSourceFile;
* Add some basic \file documentation for FrontendAction.h;
* More use of "\brief" instead of repeating the name of the entity being
documented;
* Stop using Doxygen-style "///" comments in FrontendAction.cpp, as they were
polluting the documentation for BeginSourceFile;
* Drop incorrect "\see" markup that broke Doxygen's formatting;
* Other minor documentation fixes.
llvm-svn: 173213
This allows users to promote -Wincompatible-pointer-type warnings to
errors but keep those for "discard qualifiers" as warnings (if they
so desire).
Addresses <rdar://problem/13062738>.
llvm-svn: 173184
Changing nextToken() in the UnwrappedLineParser to get the next
non-comment token. This allows us to correctly layout a whole class of
snippets, like:
if /* */(/* */ a /* */) /* */
f() /* */; /* */
else /* */
g();
Fixes a bug in the formatter where we would assume there is a previous
non-comment token.
Also adds the indent level of an unwrapped line to the debug output in
the parser.
llvm-svn: 173168
This change also makes the serialisation store the required semantics,
fixing an issue where PPC128 was always assumed when re-reading a
128-bit value.
llvm-svn: 173139
This patch changes the behavior of the -fsanitize=address flag, making it use the dynamic runtime library (libclang_rt.asan_osx_dynamic.dylib) instead of the static one. It also drops the CoreFoundation dependency, since the dynamic runtime doesn't need it.
llvm-svn: 173135
We were previously hard-coding a particular field index. This was
fine before (because we were obviously guaranteed the presence
of a copy/dispose member) except for (1) alignment padding and
(2) future extensions adding extra members to the header, such
as the extended-layout pointer.
Note that we only introduce the extended-layout pointer in the
presence of structs. (We also seem to be introducing it even
in the presence of an all-non-object layout, but that's a
different potential issue.)
llvm-svn: 173122
We used to align trailing comments belong to different things.
Before:
void f() { // some function..
}
int a; // some variable..
After:
void f() { // some function..
}
int a; // some variable..
llvm-svn: 173100
Dmitri Gribenko