owenpan added a comment.
In D146042#4204651 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D146042#4204651>, @jp4a50 wrote:
> I'm confident that the patch will indent all those examples correctly when
> they are at block scope which is the only place those snippets will actually
> be valid code. I added an exception (see comment in ContinuationIndenter.cpp)
> to the code to disable `OuterScope`'s behaviour when the line's indentation
> level is 0 (i.e. statements at namespace scope) because otherwise you can end
> up with things like:
>
> Namespace::Foo::Foo(
> Arg arg1, Arg arg2,
> Arg arg3, Arg arg4)
> : init1{arg1},
> init2{[arg2]() {
> return arg2;
> }},
> init3{arg3},
> init4{arg4} {}
Sorry that I missed it.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Format/Format.h:2652-2656
/// containing the lambda signature. For callback-heavy code, it may improve
/// readability to have the signature indented two levels and to use
/// ``OuterScope``. The KJ style guide requires ``OuterScope``.
/// `KJ style guide
/// <https://github.com/capnproto/capnproto/blob/master/style-guide.md>`_
----------------
We might as well clean it up a bit.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:21997
+ " })));\n"
+ "}\n",
+ Style);
----------------
Ditto below.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146042/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D146042
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
