ioeric added a comment.
Some nits. Some is almost good :)
BTW, do you have clang-tools-extra in your source tree? There are also some
references in the subtree to the changed interface. It would be nice if you
could also fix them in a separate patch and commit these two patches together
(I mean, within a short period of time) so that you wouldn't break build bots.
References should be found in these files:
extra/change-namespace/ChangeNamespace.cpp
extra/clang-move/ClangMove.cpp
extra/include-fixer/tool/ClangIncludeFixer.cpp
extra/clang-apply-replacements/tool/ClangApplyReplacementsMain.cpp
extra/clang-tidy/ClangTidy.cpp
Thanks!
================
Comment at: lib/Format/Format.cpp:424
+llvm::Error make_string_error(const llvm::Twine &Message) {
+ return llvm::make_error<llvm::StringError>(Message,
----------------
Maybe make this `inline`?
================
Comment at: lib/Format/Format.cpp:1901
+ // FIXME: If FallbackStyle is explicitly "none", this effectively disables
+ // replacements. Fix this by setting a separate FormatStyle variable and
+ // returning it when we mean to return the fallback style explicitly.
----------------
I'd state the problem with a specific solution only if I am sure it is the best
solution.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/Format.cpp:1955
FS->getBufferForFile(ConfigFile.str());
if (std::error_code EC = Text.getError()) {
+ return make_string_error(EC.message());
----------------
Redundant braces. Same below.
================
Comment at: lib/Tooling/Refactoring.cpp:86
- format::FormatStyle CurStyle = format::getStyle(Style, FilePath, "LLVM");
+ llvm::Expected<format::FormatStyle> FormatStyleOrError =
+ format::getStyle(Style, FilePath, "LLVM");
----------------
There is a `NewReplacements` below which is also `llvm::Expected<T>`.
`FormatStyleOrError` is a fine name, but to be we have been naming `Expected`
types without `OrError` postfix, so I'd go without `OrError` postfix for
consistency append `OrError` postfix to other expected variables. Personally, I
find expected variables without `OrError` postfix easier to understand,
especially in error checking. For example, `if (!FormatStyleOrError)` is a bit
awkward to read while `if (!FormatStyle)` is more straight-forward IMO.
Same for other changes.
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:10972
+ auto ErrorMsg4 = llvm::toString(Style4.takeError());
+ ASSERT_GT(ErrorMsg4.length(), 0);
+
----------------
This is a bit strange... Just `llvm::consumeError(Style.takeError())` if you
don't bother to check the error message, e.g. with `llvm::StringRef::starswith`
or RE match.
================
Comment at: unittests/Format/FormatTestObjC.cpp:72
TEST_F(FormatTestObjC, DetectsObjCInHeaders) {
- Style = getStyle("LLVM", "a.h", "none", "@interface\n"
+ Style = *getStyle("LLVM", "a.h", "none", "@interface\n"
"- (id)init;");
----------------
amaiorano wrote:
> In these tests, I'm assuming getStyle returns a valid FormatSyle. I could add
> the same types of validation as in the FormatStyle.GetStyleOfFile tests.
Please add proper checking as above for returned values.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D28081
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
