This combines several related changes:
a) Don't break before after the variable types in for loops with a
single variable.
b) Better indent DeclStmts defining multiple variables.
Before:
bool aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa =
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa),
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb =
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb(bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb);
for (aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaa = aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa;
aaaaaaaaaaa != aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa; ++aaaaaaaaaaa) {
}
After:
bool aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa =
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa),
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb =
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb(bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb);
for (aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa =
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa;
aaaaaaaaaaa != aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa; ++aaaaaaaaaaa) {
}
llvm-svn: 178641
It turns out that
-foo;
can be an objective C method declaration. So instead of the previous
solution, recognize objective C methods only if we are in a declaration
scope.
llvm-svn: 177740
Summary: Added support for pointers-to-members usage via .* and a few tests.
Reviewers: djasper
Reviewed By: djasper
CC: cfe-commits, klimek
Differential Revision: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D556
llvm-svn: 177537
This seems to be generally more desired.
Before:
if (aaaaaaaa &&
bbbbbbbb >
cccccccc) {}
After:
if (aaaaaaaa &&
bbbbbbbb >
cccccccc) {}
Also: Some formatting cleanup on clang-format's files.
llvm-svn: 177514
The stronger binding of a string ending in :/= does not really make
sense if it is the only character.
Before:
llvm::outs() << aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
<< "=" << bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb;
After:
llvm::outs() << aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa << "="
<< bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb;
llvm-svn: 177075
Before:
A = new SomeType * [Length];
A = new SomeType *[Length]();
After:
A = new SomeType *[Length];
A = new SomeType *[Length]();
Small formatting cleanups with clang-format.
llvm-svn: 176936
In builder type call, we indent to the laster function calls.
However, for the last element of such a call, we don't need to do
so, as that normally just wastes space and does not increase
readability.
Before:
aaaaaa->aaaaaa->aaaaaa( // break
aaaaaa);
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
After:
aaaaaa->aaaaaa->aaaaaa( // break
aaaaaa);
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
llvm-svn: 176352
Empty lines followed by line comments are often used to highlight the
comment. Empty lines somewhere else are usually left over from manual or
automatic formatting and should probably be removed.
Before (clang-format would keep):
S s = {
a,
b
};
After:
S s = { a, b };
llvm-svn: 176086
In conditional expressions, if the condition is split over multiple
lines, also break before both operands.
This prevents formattings like:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ==
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ? b : c;
Which are bad, because they suggestion incorrect operator precedence:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ==
(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ? b : c);
This lead to the discovery that the expression parser incorrectly
handled conditional operators and that it could also handle semicolons
(which in turn reduced the amount of special casing for for-loops). As a
side-effect, we can now apply the bin-packing configuration to the
sections of for-loops.
llvm-svn: 175973
Also don't break in long include directives as that is not desired.
We can now format:
#include "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"
#define LL_FORMAT "ll"
printf("aaaaa: %d, bbbbbbbbb: %" LL_FORMAT "d, cccccccc: %" LL_FORMAT
"d, ddddddddd: %" LL_FORMAT "d\n");
Before, this led to weird results.
llvm-svn: 175959
This fixes llvm.org/PR15033.
Also: Always break before a parameter, if the previous parameter was
split over multiple lines. This was necessary to make the right
decisions in for-loops, almost always makes the code more readable and
also fixes llvm.org/PR14873.
Before:
for (llvm::ArrayRef<NamedDecl *>::iterator I = FD->getDeclsInPrototypeScope()
.begin(), E = FD->getDeclsInPrototypeScope().end();
I != E; ++I) {
}
foo(bar(bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb,
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc), d, bar(e, f));
After:
for (llvm::ArrayRef<NamedDecl *>::iterator
I = FD->getDeclsInPrototypeScope().begin(),
E = FD->getDeclsInPrototypeScope().end();
I != E; ++I) {
}
foo(bar(bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb,
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc),
d, bar(e, f));
llvm-svn: 175741
If the code author decides to put empty lines anywhere into the code we
should treat them equally, i.e. reduce them to the configured
MaxEmptyLinesToKeep.
With this change, we e.g. keep the newline in:
SomeType ST = {
// First value
a,
// Second value
b
};
llvm-svn: 175620
In builder-type calls, it can be very confusing to just indent
parameters from the start of the line. Instead, indent 4 from the
correct function call.
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa()->aaaaaa(bbbbb)->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa( // break
aaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *aaaaaaaaa = aaaaaa->aaaaaaaaaaaa()->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa)
->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa();
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa()->aaaaaa(bbbbb)->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa( // break
aaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa *aaaaaaaaa = aaaaaa->aaaaaaaaaaaa()
->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa)
->aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa();
llvm-svn: 175444
This fixes llvm.org/PR15248.
Before:
Test::Test(int b) : a(b *b) {}
for (int i = 0; i < a *a; ++i) {}
After:
Test::Test(int b) : a(b * b) {}
for (int i = 0; i < a * a; ++i) {}
llvm-svn: 175439
The current heuristic assumes that there can't be binary operators in
builder-type calls (excluding assigments). However, it also excluded
< and > in general, which is wrong. Now they are only excluded if they
are template parameters.
Before:
return aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaa().aaaaaaaaaaaaa()i
.aaaaaa() < aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaa().aaaaaaaaaaaaa().aaaaaa();
After:
return aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaa().aaaaaaaaaaaaa().aaaaaa() <
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa->aaaaa().aaaaaaaaaaaaa().aaaaaa();
llvm-svn: 175291
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa()
.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa());
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa().aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa());
Not sure which of the formattings above is better, but we should not pick
one by accident.
llvm-svn: 175165
This gives a clearer separation of the context, e.g. in GMOCK
statements.
Before:
EXPECT_CALL(SomeObject,
SomeFunction(Parameter)).WillRepeatedly(Return(SomeValue));
After:
EXPECT_CALL(SomeObject, SomeFunction(Parameter))
.WillRepeatedly(Return(SomeValue));
Minor format cleanups.
llvm-svn: 175162
This fixes llvm.org/PR15179.
Before:
class ColorChooserMac : public content::ColorChooser,
public content::WebContentsObserver {
};
After:
class ColorChooserMac : public content::ColorChooser,
public content::WebContentsObserver {
};
llvm-svn: 175147
This has so far been disabled for Google style, but should be done
before breaking at nested name specifiers or in template parameters.
Before (in Google style):
template <typename T>
aaaaaaaa::aaaaa::aaaaaa<T, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa> aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<
T>::aaaaaaa() {}
After:
template <typename T>
aaaaaaaa::aaaaa::aaaaaa<T, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<T>::aaaaaaa() {}
llvm-svn: 175074
Daniel Jasper