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
An unwrapped line can get moved around if there is no newline before
it and the previous line was formatted.
Example:
template<typename T> // Cursor is on this line when hitting "format"
T *getFETokenInfo() const { return static_cast<T*>(FETokenInfo); }
"return .." is the second unwrapped line in this scenario. I does not
touch any reformatted region. Thus, the result of formatting is:
template <typename T> T *getFETokenInfo() const { return static_cast<T *>(FETokenInfo); }
After second format (and arguably desired end-result):
template <typename T> T *getFETokenInfo() const {
return static_cast<T *>(FETokenInfo);
}
This fixes: llvm.org/PR15060.
llvm-svn: 175440
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
This got lost and was untested as the same effect is achieved by
avoiding bin packing, which is active in Google style by default.
However, moving forward, we want more control over the bin packing
option(s) and thus, this flag should work as expected.
llvm-svn: 175277
This is almost always more readable.
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
? aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa : aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa;
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
? aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa;
llvm-svn: 175262
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
So far, clang-format has always assumed the whitespace belonging to the
subsequent token. This has the negative side-effect that when
clang-format formats a line, it does not remove its trailing whitespace,
as it belongs to the next token.
Thus, this patch fixes most of llvm.org/PR15062.
We are not zapping a file's trailing whitespace so far, as this does not
belong to any token we see during formatting. We need to fix this in a
subsequent patch.
llvm-svn: 175152
The formatter can now format:
void aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(int level,
double *min_x,
double *max_x,
double *min_y,
double *max_y,
double *min_z,
double *max_z, ) {
}
Although this is invalid code, it frequently happens during development and
clang-format should be nicer :-).
llvm-svn: 175151
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
Still the formatting can be improved, but at least we don't assert any
more. This happened when trying to format lib/Sema/SemaType.cpp.
llvm-svn: 175003
This redoes how '*' and '&' are classified as pointer / reference markers when
followed by ')', '>', or ','.
Previously, determineStarAmpUsage() marked a single '*' and '&' followed by
')', '>', or ',' as pointer or reference marker. Now, all '*'s and '&'s
preceding ')', '>', or ',' are marked as pointer / reference markers. Fixes
PR14884.
Since only the last '*' in 'int ***' was marked as pointer before (the rest
were unary operators, which don't reach spaceRequiredBetween()),
spaceRequiredBetween() now had to be thought about handing multiple '*'s in
sequence.
Before:
return sizeof(int * *);
Type **A = static_cast<Type * *>(P);
Now:
return sizeof(int**);
Type **A = static_cast<Type **>(P);
While here, also make all methods of AnnotatingParser except parseLine()
private.
Review URL: http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D384
llvm-svn: 174975
Before:
for (id foo in[self getStuffFor : bla]) {
}
Now:
for (id foo in [self getStuffFor:bla]) {
}
"in" is treated as loop keyword if the line starts with "for", and as a
regular identifier else. To check for "in", its IdentifierInfo is handed
through a few layers.
llvm-svn: 174889
In google style, trailing comments are separated by two spaces. This
patch fixes the counting of these spaces and prevents clang-format from
creating a line with 81 columns.
llvm-svn: 174879
As it turns out, this already works reasonably well.
This example from http://clang.llvm.org/docs/ObjectiveCLiterals.html
NSDictionary *dictionary = @{
@"name" : NSUserName(),
@"date" : [NSDate date],
@"processInfo" : [NSProcessInfo processInfo]
};
is formatted like
NSDictionary *dictionary = @{ @"name" : NSUserName(), @"date" : [NSDate date],
@"processInfo" : [NSProcessInfo processInfo] };
There's already a FIXME in NestedStaticInitializers about supporting one
initializer per line, which is really all that's missing here too.
llvm-svn: 174842
Before:
@{
foo:
bar
}
;
Now:
@{ foo : bar };
parseBracedList() already does the right thing from an UnwrappedLineParser
perspective, so check for "@{" in all loops that process constructs that can
contain expressions and call parseBracedList() if found.
llvm-svn: 174840
With this patch, the formatter introduces 'fake' parenthesis according
to the operator precedence of binary operators.
Before:
return aaaa & AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA || bbbb &
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB || cccc & CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ||
dddd & DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD;
f(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa &&
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
After:
return aaaa & AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ||
bbbb & BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB ||
cccc & CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ||
dddd & DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD;
f(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
Future improvements:
- Get rid of some of the hacky ways to nicely format certain constructs.
- Merge this parser and the AnnotatingParser as we now have several parsers
that analyze (), [], etc.
llvm-svn: 174714
We now correctly format:
// Written as a macro, it is reformatted from:
#define foo(a) \
do { \
/* Initialize num to zero. */ \
int num = 10; \
/* This line ensures a is never zero. */ \
int i = a == 0 ? 1 : a; \
i = num / i; /* This division is OK. */ \
return i; \
} while (false)
llvm-svn: 174517
With this patch, clang-format can analyze the input file for two
properties:
1. Is "int *a" or "int* a" more common.
2. Are non-C++03 constructs used, e.g. A<A<A>>.
With Google-style, clang-format will now use the more common style for
(1) and format C++03 compatible, unless it finds C++11 constructs in the
input.
llvm-svn: 174504
Properly handle annotation contexts while calculating extra information
for each token. This enable nested ObjC calls and thus solves (most of)
llvm.org/PR15164. E.g., we can now format:
[contentsContainer replaceSubview:[subviews objectAtIndex:0]
with:contentsNativeView];
Also fix a problem with the formatting of types in casts as this was
trivial now.
llvm-svn: 174498
1. let determineStarAmp() check of unary operators before checking for
"is next '['". That check was added in r173150, and the test from that
revision passes either way.
2. change determineStarAmp() to categorize '*' and '&' after '=' as unary
operator.
3. don't let parseSquare() overwrite the type of a '*' or '&' before the start
of an objc message expression if has the role of unary operator.
llvm-svn: 174489
We can now format stuff like:
- (void)doSomethingWith:(GTMFoo *)theFoo
rect:(NSRect)theRect
interval:(float)theInterval {
[myObject doFooWith:arg1 //
name:arg2
error:arg3];
}
This seems to fix everything mentioned in llvm.org/PR14939.
llvm-svn: 174364
In preprocessor definitions, we would not parse all the tokens and thus
not annotate them anymore. This led to a wrong formatting of comments
in google style:
#endif // HEADER_GUARD -- requires two spaces
llvm-svn: 174361
If there are string literals on either side of a '<<', chances are
high that they represent logically separate concepts. Otherwise,
the author could just have just a single literal (possible split
over multiple lines).
So, we can now nicely format things like:
cout << "somepacket = {\n"
<< " val a = " << ValueA << "\n"
<< " val b = " << ValueB << "\n"
<< "}";
llvm-svn: 174310
This combines several changes:
* Calculation token type (e.g. for * and &) in the AnnotatingParser.
* Calculate the scope binding strength in the AnnotatingParser.
* Let <> and [] scopes bind stronger than () and {} scopes.
* Add minimal debugging output.
llvm-svn: 174307
1. Never avoid bin packing in static initializers as this can
lead to terrible results.
2. If an element has to be broken over multiple lines, break after
the following comma.
This should be a step forward, but there are still many cases
especially with nested static initializers that we handle badly.
More patches will follow.
llvm-svn: 174061
The style guide only forbids this for function declarations. So,
now
someFunction(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaa);
Is allowed in Chromium mode.
llvm-svn: 173806
Before (in good cases):
for (auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
: aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) {}
for (auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa : aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaa)) {}
After:
for (auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa :
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa) {}
for (auto aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa :
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaa)) {}
llvm-svn: 173684
Before we did not really systematically format those. Now, we format the
different cases as:
- 1 Line: a ? b : c;
- 2 Lines: short ? loooooooooong
: loooooooooong
- 2 Lines: loooooooooooooooong
? short : short
- 3 Lines: loooooooooooooooong
? loooooooooooooong
: loooooooooooooong
Not sure whether "?" and ":" should go on the new line, but it seems to
be the most consistent approach.
llvm-svn: 173683
1. Use a hanging ident for function calls nested in binary expressions.
E.g.:
int aaaaa = aaaaaaaaa && aaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaa);
2. Slightly improve heuristic for builder type expressions and reduce
penalty for breaking before "." and "->" in those.
3. Remove mostly obsolete metric of decreasing indent level. This
fixes: llvm.org/PR14931.
Changes #1 and #2 were necessary to keep tests passing after #3.
llvm-svn: 173680
These always represent a continuation and we should increase the ident.
Before:
aaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa::
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
After:
aaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa::
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
llvm-svn: 173675
This combines two small changes:
1) Put a penalty on breaking after "<"
2) Only produce a hanging indent when parameters are separated by
commas.
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>(aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaa(new Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa<aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa>(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
aaaaaa(new Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa));
This changes one ObjC test, but AFAICT this is not according to any
style guide (neither before nor after). We probably should be aligning
on the ":" there according to:
http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/objcguide.xml?showone=Method_Invocations#Method_Invocations
llvm-svn: 173457
Otherwise, really long nested name specifiers can easily lead to a
violation of the column limit.
Not sure about the rules for indentation in those cases, so input is
appreciated (see tests.).
llvm-svn: 173438
Before:
int aaaa = aaaaa().aaaaa() // force break
.aaaaa();
After:
int aaaa = aaaaa().aaaaa() // force break
.aaaaa();
The other indent is just wrong and confusing.
llvm-svn: 173273
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
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
