We can now configure the space between requires and the following paren,
seperate for clauses and expressions.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113369
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53576.
There was an inconsistency in formatting of delete expressions.
Before:
```
delete (void*)a;
delete[](void*) a;
```
After this patch:
```
delete (void*)a;
delete[] (void*)a;
```
Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, owenpan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D119117
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53430.
Initially, I had a quick and dirty approach, but it led to a myriad of special cases handling comments (that may add unwrapped lines).
So I added TT_RecordLBrace type annotations and it seems like a much nicer solution.
I think that in the future it will allow us to clean up some convoluted code that detects records.
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay, HazardyKnusperkeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D118337
- Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/53227 that wrongly
indents multiline comments
- Fixes wrong detection of single-line opening braces when used along
with those only opening scopes, causing crashes due to duplicated
replacements on the same token:
void foo()
{
{
int x;
}
}
- Fixes wrong recognition of first line of definition when the line
starts with block comment, causing crashes due to duplicated
replacements on the same token for this leads toward skipping the line
starting with inline block comment:
/*
Some descriptions about function
*/
/*inline*/ void bar() {
}
- Fixes wrong recognition of enum when used as a type name rather than
starting definition block, causing crashes due to duplicated
replacements on the same token since both actions for enum and for
definition blocks were taken place:
void foobar(const enum EnumType e) {
}
- Change to use function keyword for JavaScript instead of comparing
strings
- Resolves formatting conflict with options EmptyLineAfterAccessModifier
and EmptyLineBeforeAccessModifier (prompts with --dry-run (-n) or
--output-replacement-xml but no observable change)
- Recognize long (len>=5) uppercased name taking a single line as return
type and fix the problem of adding newline below it, with adding new
token type FunctionLikeOrFreestandingMacro and marking tokens in
UnwrappedLineParser:
void
afunc(int x) {
return;
}
TYPENAME
func(int x, int y) {
// ...
}
- Remove redundant and repeated initialization
- Do no change to newlines before EOF
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay, curdeius, HazardyKnusperkeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117520
This factors out a pattern that comes up from time to time.
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay, HazardyKnusperkeks, owenpan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117769
Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/44601.
This patch handles a bug when parsing a below example code :
```
template <class> class S;
template <class T> bool operator<(S<T> const &x, S<T> const &y) {
return x.i < y.i;
}
template <class T> class S {
int i = 42;
friend bool operator< <>(S const &, S const &);
};
int main() { return S<int>{} < S<int>{}; }
```
which parse `< <>` as `<< >`, not `< <>` in terms of tokens as discussed in discord.
1. Add a condition in `tryMergeLessLess()` considering `operator` keyword and `>`
2. Force to leave a whitespace between `tok::less` and a template opener
3. Add unit test
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay, curdeius
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D117398
This style is similar to AlwaysBreak, but places closing brackets on new lines.
For example, if you have a multiline parameter list, clang-format currently only supports breaking per-parameter, but places the closing bracket on the line of the last parameter.
Function(
param1,
param2,
param3);
A style supported by other code styling tools (e.g. rustfmt) is to allow the closing brackets to be placed on their own line, aiding the user in being able to quickly infer the bounds of the block of code.
Function(
param1,
param2,
param3
);
For prior work on a similar feature, see: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33029.
Note: This currently only supports block indentation for closing parentheses.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109557
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/27037
Sorry its taken so long to get to this issue! (got it before it hit its 6th birthday!)
```
void operator delete(void *foo)ATTRIB;
```
(void *foo) is incorrectly determined to be a C-Style Cast resulting in the space being removed after the ) and before the attrib, due to the detection of
```
delete (A* )a;
```
The following was previously unaffected
```
void operator new(void *foo) ATTRIB;
```
Fixes#27037
Reviewed By: curdeius, HazardyKnusperkeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116920
This change adds an option AfterOverloadedOperator in SpaceBeforeParensOptions to add a space between overloaded operator and opening parentheses in clang-format.
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay, curdeius, HazardyKnusperkeks
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116283
My team has a vendetta against lines ending with an open parenthesis, thought it might be useful for others too 😊
Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, curdeius
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116170
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/52881
It seems that clang-format off/on is not being honoured in regard to adding spaces.
My understanding of clang-format off/on is that it marks the token as finalized based on whether formatting is currently enabled or disabled.
This was causing a space to be added between the `<` and `<<` in the Cuda kernel `foo<<<1, 1>>>();`
This if doesn't solve this actual issue but ensure that clang-format is at least honoured.
Reviewed By: curdeius, owenpan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D116494
Move the handling of brace wrapping after => from unwrapped line
parser to token annotator and clean up the parser.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D115967
Responding to a Discord call to help {D113977} and heavily inspired by the unlanded {D34225} add some support to help coroutinues from not being formatted from
```for co_await(auto elt : seq)```
to
```
for
co_await(auto elt : seq)
```
Because of the dominance of clang-format in the C++ community, I don't think we should make it the blocker that prevents users from embracing the newer parts of the standard because we butcher the layout of some of the new constucts.
Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, Quuxplusone, ChuanqiXu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114859
{D110833} regressed behavior of spaces before parentheses for operators, this revision reverts that so that operators are handled as they were before.
I think in hindsight it was a mistake to try and consume operator behaviour in with the function behaviour, I think Operators can be considered a special style. Its seems the code is getting confused as to if this is a function declaration or definition.
I think latterly we can consider adding an operator parentheses specific custom option but this should have been explicitly called out as it can impact projects.
Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, curdeius
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114696
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52517
clang-format is butchering modules, this could easily become a barrier to entry for modules given clang-formats wide spread use.
Prevent the following from adding spaces around the `:` (cf was considering the ':' as an InheritanceColon)
Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, owenpan, ChuanqiXu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114151
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52595
missing space between `T(&&)` but not between `T (&` due to && being incorrectly thought of as `UnaryOperator` rather than `PointerOrReference`
```
int operator()(T (&)[N]) { return 0; }
int operator()(T(&&)[N]) { return 1; }
```
Existing Unit tests are changed because actually I think they are originally incorrect, and are inconsistent with the (&) cases that are 4 or 5 lines above them.
Reviewed By: curdeius
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114519
1. IndexTokenSource::getNextToken cannot return nullptr; some code was
still written assuming it can; make getNextToken more resilient against
incorrect input and fix its call-sites.
2. Change various asserts that can happen due to user provided input to
conditionals in the code.
Björn Schäpers