jp4a50 marked 2 inline comments as done. jp4a50 added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Format/Format.cpp:1372 LLVMStyle.DerivePointerAlignment = false; + LLVMStyle.DesignatedInitializerIndentWidth = 4; LLVMStyle.DisableFormat = false; ---------------- jp4a50 wrote: > MyDeveloperDay wrote: > > so lets say someone is using an IndentWidth of 2 and now you introduce this > > as being 4 here as the default > > > > Without them changing anything, all their DesignatedIntializer code will > > get refactored to a IndentWidth of 4 rather than the 2 it was previously > > > > This is where we get called out for "changing the defaults", which really > > we are not we are just reclassifying how it behaves. > > > > What we normally say here is can you point us to a public style that has an > > independent DesignatedIntializerIndentWidth which is independent from the > > levels of IndentWidth everywhere else. > > > > Whilst I can see more knobs feels good, this will change code and we'll > > have to manage that expectation. > > > > > > > Yep, so as per my comment in `clang/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.rst` I think > I am changing my mind about this anyway. > > My motivation for making this change is to support the [[ > https://github.com/capnproto/capnproto/blob/master/kjdoc/style-guide.md | KJ > style guide ]] which is quoted in the [[ > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/51070 | github issue ]] - I work > on a team that uses the KJ style guide. > > The KJ style guide wants a designated initializer indent width of 2 along > with a "normal" indent width of 2, so there is no explicit need for us to > have those two values be different. > > When originally making these changes, I did think that having "more knobs" > was a good idea, but I agree that this could lead to annoying behaviour for > some users and they would probably expect the designated initializer indent > to match either the normal indent or the continuation indent. > > How about I change the option to an integer and, when it's -1 (the default), > the designated initializer indent matches the continuation indent, but if it > is set to a value >= 0 then that number of columns is used instead? > I've reimplemented the option as a signed integer as per my suggestion above. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146101/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146101 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
