On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 06:07:55PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> > The above is misformatted. The ? and : shouldn't be indented further than
> > the dataref_offset, but usually e.g. for the sake of emacs we add ()s around
> > the expression in this case. So:
> > tree offset = (dataref_offset
> > ? dataref_offset
> > : build_int_cst (ref_type, 0));
> > or
> > tree offset
> > = (dataref_offset
> > ? dataref_offset : build_int_cst (ref_type, 0));
> >
>
> Thanks Jakub! I'll follow this by add () for ternary expression.
> With manual added "()", clang-format can get below:
Note, the () isn't about ternary expressions, if everything fits on one
line, there is no reason to add ()s, so
tree offset = dataref_offset ? dataref_offset : build_int_cst (ref_type, 0);
is just fine that way, on the other side
int whatever = HOST_WIDE_INT_1U
+ foobarbaz (qux);
should have them too, like:
int whatever = (HOST_WIDE_INT_1U
+ foobarbaz (qux));
or
int whatever
= HOST_WIDE_INT_1U + foobarbaz (qux);
I don't use emacs, but was told that emacs without the ()s would misindent
it like (I think):
int whatever = HOST_WIDE_INT_1U
+ foobarbaz (qux);
which is what we do not want.
>
> tree offset
> = (dataref_offset ? dataref_offset
> : build_int_cst (ref_type, 0));
>
> contrib/check_GNU_style.sh didn't complain this, I'm not sure whether
> it's possible to add this kind of convention into contrib/clang-format.
clang-format is not our official indentation style; I have no problem with
the above formatting from readability POV, though unsure what emacs will do
with that (but if it moves that : right below the first dataref_offset,
no big deal, that is also fine and probably more appropriate if the
build_int_cst... is long and would need more wrapping).
Jakub
