MyDeveloperDay added a comment.
You've dropped the test on your most recent updated
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:6603-6622
+ EXPECT_EQ(
+ "struct Derived {\n"
+ " Derived(\n"
+ " int firstArgWithLongName,\n"
+ " int secondArgWithLongName,\n"
+ " int thirdArgWithLongName,\n"
+ " int fourthArgWithLongName)\n"
----------------
hel-ableton wrote:
> HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > Is the behavior different when the code is already formatted like you want
> > it? (It shouldn't.) Then you should use `verifyFormat()`.
> Not sure I understand. Would you like the test to be re-written so that the
> code is already formatted like the result of the formatting?
The starting state of the code should not be important, verifyFormat will
"messUp" the code spacing to test this out, your are verifiying that it
maintains what you want.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136154/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136154
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
