Before:
int i = aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ?
/*bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb=*/bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb :
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
After:
int i = aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ?
/*bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb=*/bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb :
ccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
llvm-svn: 259670
After reading the style guides again, they don't actually say how to
pack or not pack array literals. Based on some user reports, array
initializers can unnecessarily get quite long if they contain many
small elements. Array literals with trailing commas are still formatted
one per line so that users have a way to opt out of the packing.
Before:
var array = [
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa,
aaaaaa
];
After:
var array = [
aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa, aaaaaa,
aaaaaa, aaaaaa
];
llvm-svn: 257615
r257257 change the way clang-format enforces line breaks after a
templated type has been line-wrapped. This was to fix an incorrect line
break if BinPackParameters is set to false. However, it also leads to
an unwanted line break in a different case. Thus, for now, only do this
when BinPackParameters is false. This isn't ideal yet, but helps us
until we have a better solution.
With BinPackParameters:
Before:
void fffffffffff(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaa> aaaaaaaaaa);
After:
void fffffffffff(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaa>
aaaaaaaaaa);
llvm-svn: 257325
Before (example is JS, but also applies to C++):
return [
aaaa()
.bbbbbbbb('A'),
aaaa().bbbbbbbb('B'),
aaaa().bbbbbbbb('C'),
];
After:
return [
aaaa().bbbbbbbb('A'),
aaaa().bbbbbbbb('B'),
aaaa().bbbbbbbb('C'),
];
llvm-svn: 257079
r256750 has been leading to an undesired behavior:
aaaaaaaaaa
.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
This change increases penalty for wrapping before member accesses that aren't
calls. Thus, this is again formatted as (as it has been before r256750):
aaaaaaaaaa.aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
llvm-svn: 256830
This changes the behavior of AlwaysBreakAfterDeclarationReturnType
so that it supports breaking after declarations, definitions, or
both.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10370
Reviewed By: Daniel Jasper
llvm-svn: 256046
Specifically, don't wrap between the {} of an empty constructor if the
"}" falls on column 81 and ConstructorInitializerAllOnOneLineOrOnePerLine
is set.
llvm-svn: 251406
Summary:
If this option is set, clang-format will always insert a line wrap, e.g.
before the first parameter of a function call unless all parameters fit
on the same line. This obviates the need to make a decision on the
alignment itself.
Use this style for Google's JavaScript style and add some minor tweaks
to correctly handle nested blocks etc. with it. Don't use this option
for for/while loops.
Reviewers: klimek
Subscribers: klimek, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D14104
llvm-svn: 251405
This is a bit of a step back of what we did in r222531, as there are
some corner cases in C++, where this kind of formatting is really bad.
Example:
Before:
virtual aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(std::function<bool()> IsKindWeWant = [&]() {
return true;
}, aaaaa aaaaaaaaa);
After:
virtual aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(std::function<bool()> IsKindWeWant =
[&]() { return true; },
aaaaa aaaaaaaaa);
The block formatting logic in JavaScript will probably go some other changes,
too, and we'll potentially be able to make the rules more consistent again. For
now, this seems to be the best approach for C++.
llvm-svn: 245694
conservative.
In particular, this fixes an unwanted corner case.
Before:
string s =
someFunction("aaaa"
"bbbb");
After:
string s = someFunction(
"aaaa"
"bbbb");
llvm-svn: 240129
It was a bit too aggressive.
With this patch, we keep on breaking here:
aaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaa,
"aaaaaaa"
"bbbbbbb");
But don't break in:
aaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaa, aaaaaaaa("aaaaaaa"
"bbbbbbb"));
llvm-svn: 240024
Before:
var func =
function() {
doSomething();
};
After:
var func =
function() {
doSomething();
};
This is a very narrow special case which fixes most of the discrepency
with what our users do. In the long run, we should try to come up with
a more generic fix for indenting these.
llvm-svn: 240014
In essence this is meant to consistently indent multiline strings by a
fixed amount of spaces from the start of the line. Don't do this in
cases where it wouldn't help anyway.
Before:
someFunction(aaaaa,
"aaaaa"
"bbbbb");
After:
someFunction(aaaaa, "aaaaa"
"bbbbb");
llvm-svn: 240004
Before:
template <typename T>
auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(T t) -> decltype(eaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<T>(t.a)
.aaaaaaaa());
After:
template <typename T>
auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(T t)
-> decltype(eaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<T>(t.a).aaaaaaaa());
Also add a test case for a difficult template parsing case I stumbled accross.
Needs fixing.
llvm-svn: 239149
Before:
someFunction(() =>
{
doSomething(); // break
})
.doSomethingElse( // break
);
After:
someFunction(() => {
doSomething(); // break
})
.doSomethingElse( // break
);
This is still bad, but at least it is consistent with what we do for other
function literals. Added corresponding tests.
llvm-svn: 238736
A definintion like this could not be formatted at all:
constructor({aa}: {
aa?: string,
aaaaaaaa?: string,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?: boolean,
aaaaaa?: List<string>
}) {
}
llvm-svn: 238291
instead of BinPackParameters. Braced lists are used as constructor
calls in many places and so the bin-packing should follow what is done
for other calls and not what is done for function declarations.
llvm-svn: 238184
Before:
ASSERT("aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa")
<< aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
<< bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb;
After:
ASSERT("aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa") << aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
<< bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb;
Also cleanup implementation a bit and only mark closing parenthesis of
these annotations.
llvm-svn: 237567
before binary/ternary operators.
Basically, it doesn't seem right to indent a nested block aligned to a
binary or ternary operator.
Before:
int i = aaaaaa ? 1 //
: [] {
return 2; //
}();
llvm::errs() << "number of twos is "
<< std::count_if(v.begin(), v.end(), [](int x) {
return x == 2; // force break
});
After:
int i = aaaaaa ? 1 //
: [] {
return 2; //
}();
llvm::errs() << "number of twos is "
<< std::count_if(v.begin(), v.end(), [](int x) {
return x == 2; // force break
});
llvm-svn: 237263
Before:
[aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:
aaaaaaaa aaa:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa];
After:
[aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:aaaaaaaa
aaa:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa];
Note that this might now violate the column limit and we probably need an
alternative way of indenting these then. However, that is still strictly better
than the messy formatting that clang-format did before.
llvm-svn: 236598
There was already a TODO to double-check whether the extra indenation
makes sense. A slightly different case reveals that it is actively harmful:
for (int i = 0; i < aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ||
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb < ccccccccccccccc;
++i) {
}
Here (and it is probably not a totally infrequent case, it just works out that
"i < " is four spaces and so the four space extra indentation makes the
operator precedence confusing. So, this will now instead be formatted
as:
for (int i = 0; i < aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ||
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb < ccccccccccccccc;
++i) {
}
llvm-svn: 231461
Before:
Aaaa aaaaaaaaaaa{
{
a, // +1 indent weird.
b, // trailing comma signals one per line.
}, // trailing comma signals one per line.
};
After:
Aaaa aaaaaaaaaaa{
{
a, // better!?
b, // trailing comma signals one per line.
}, // trailing comma signals one per line.
};
Interesting that this apparently was entirely untested :-(.
llvm-svn: 230627
The proper way to break string literals in these languages is by inserting a "+"
between parts which we don't support yet. So we disable string literal breaking
until then.
llvm-svn: 224120
This only applies when not aligning after the return itself (which is
commonly done for C++.
Before:
return aaaaaaaaaa
? bbbbbbbbbb(
bbbbbb) // This is indented relative to aaaaaaaaaa.
: b;
After:
return aaaaaaaaaa
? bbbbbbbbbb(
bbbbbb)
: b;
llvm-svn: 223694
With alignment:
int aaaaaa = aa
+ bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
* cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
Without alignment:
int aaaaaa = aa
+ bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
* cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc;
This fixes llvm.org/PR21666.
llvm-svn: 223117
Previously this was only used for JavaScript.
Before:
functionCall({
int i;
int j;
},
aaaa, bbbb, cccc);
After:
functionCall({
int i;
int j;
}, aaaa, bbbb, cccc);
llvm-svn: 222531
Doesn't seem to be common practice in Java.
Before:
return aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
&& bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
&& ccccccccccccccccccc;
After:
return aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
&& bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb
&& ccccccccccccccccccc;
Patch by Harry Terkelsen.
llvm-svn: 222424
Apparently, people are very much divided on what the "correct"
indentation is. So, best to give them a choice.
The new flag is called ObjCBlockIndentWidth and the default is now set
to the same value as IndentWidth for the pre-defined styles.
llvm-svn: 220784
Before:
void
SomeFunction(int parameter);
After:
void SomeFunction(
int parameter);
(Unless AlwaysBreakAfterDefinitionReturnType after type is set).
llvm-svn: 220686
Daniel Jasper