obfuscated added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Format/FormatTokenLexer.cpp:386 String->HasUnescapedNewline = Macro->HasUnescapedNewline; + String->TMacroStringLiteral = true; ---------------- krasimir wrote: > In the original code, TMacro detection was done as: > ``` > (Text.startswith(Prefix = "_T(\"") && Text.endswith(Postfix = "\")")) > ``` > In the new code the left part is saved in TMacroStringLiteral, and the right > part is checked in ContinuationIndenter. Could you keep them together in > `FormatTokenLexer`. > @alexfh, why are we checking for the right check at all? What would be an > example where this is needed to disambiguate? > Are you talking about the code in ContinuationIndenter::createBreakableToken? I don't think I understand how the hole thing works. Using the debugger I can see that this function is executed first and then createBreakableToken. So we first detect the tmacro in FormatTokenLexer::tryMerge_TMacro and then use this information in the createBreakableToken to do something with it. So when I get a TMacroStringLiteral==true in createBreakableToken I know that the token starts with a TMacro and there is no need to use some king of startswith calls. Probably the endswith call is redundant and I can do just a string search backwards... https://reviews.llvm.org/D44765 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
