================
@@ -22537,10 +22537,12 @@ TEST_F(FormatTest, FormatsLambdas) {
" }\n"
"}",
Style);
- verifyFormat("std::sort(v.begin(), v.end(),\n"
- " [](const auto &foo, const auto &bar) {\n"
- " return foo.baz < bar.baz;\n"
- "});",
----------------
owenca wrote:
> I can add this back in but the reason I removed it in favour of putting the
> equivalent code inside block scope is because the code in this example is a
> violation of C++ grammar given it is not actually a declaration but is at
> namespace/global scope.
Yeah, but many clang-format test cases (`return` statements, function calls,
etc) seem "invalid" because they are not wrapped in a block. What if the test
case above is in a macro definition?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66755
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
