owenpan added a comment. In D137181#3918715 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137181#3918715>, @goldstein.w.n wrote:
> In D137181#3918673 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137181#3918673>, @owenpan wrote: > >> Below is how I defined `PPLevel`: >> >> $ git diff UnwrappedLineParser.h >> diff --git a/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.h >> b/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.h >> index b9b106bcc89a..a234f6852e0c 100644 >> --- a/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.h >> +++ b/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.h >> @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ struct UnwrappedLine { >> >> /// The indent level of the \c UnwrappedLine. >> unsigned Level; >> + /// The \c PPBranchLevel (adjusted for header guards) of the macro >> definition >> + /// this line belongs to. >> + unsigned PPLevel; >> >> /// Whether this \c UnwrappedLine is part of a preprocessor directive. >> bool InPPDirective; >> @@ -358,7 +361,7 @@ struct UnwrappedLineNode { >> }; >> >> inline UnwrappedLine::UnwrappedLine() >> - : Level(0), InPPDirective(false), InPragmaDirective(false), >> + : Level(0), PPLevel(0), InPPDirective(false), >> InPragmaDirective(false), >> InMacroBody(false), MustBeDeclaration(false), >> MatchingOpeningBlockLineIndex(kInvalidIndex) {} >> >> >> Conceptually, I think it's more accurate to make `PPLevel` to mean the PP >> branching level of the `#define` line, not the first line of the macro body. >> IMO it may simplify the changes you made to the formatter. > > Hmm? Not sure what you mean. Does the comments above `unsigned PPLevel;` in the above `git diff` output help? Anyway, you already addressed my comment by decreasing `PPLevel` by 1, so it's ok now. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137181/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137181 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
