alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765#1045789, @obfuscated wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765#1045373, @alexfh wrote: > > > We can't just treat `anything("....")` like the _T macro. There should be a > > whitelist configurable with an option. By default only _T should be handled. > > > What cases could break with this version of the patch? It is fine to split `_T("veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong striiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing")` as _T("veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery ") _T("loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong ") _T("striiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing") and it's incorrect to split it like this: _T("veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery " "loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong " "striiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing") since only the first string literal will get the L prefix in case when `_T(x)` is defined as `L ## x`. The same is valid for `wxT()` as I understand. However, it's wrong to do so for any function or any macro which uses its argument in any way different from that of _T. E.g. `strlen("aaa bbb")` is not the same as strlen("aaa ") strlen("bbb") > I'm fine adding an option if this is deemed acceptable. I'd say this should be an option. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
