This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rL293898: [clang-format] Don't reflow across comment pragmas.
(authored by krasimir).
Changed prior to commit:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29450?vs=86814&id=86816#toc
Repository:
rL LLVM
https://reviews
krasimir updated this revision to Diff 86814.
krasimir added a comment.
- Merge branch 'master' into arcpatch-D29450_1
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29450
Files:
lib/Format/BreakableToken.cpp
lib/Format/BreakableToken.h
lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp
lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
krasimir updated this revision to Diff 86813.
krasimir edited the summary of this revision.
krasimir added a comment.
- Add a break in line comment sections by pragmas
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29450
Files:
lib/Format/BreakableToken.cpp
lib/Format/BreakableToken.h
lib/Format/ContinuationI
djasper accepted this revision.
djasper added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
Makes sense.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29450
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
krasimir added a comment.
Ideally, we may try doing both: break a line comment section token steam and
keep this too. What do you think?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D29450
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/c
krasimir added a comment.
That sounds reasonable. However it won't work with comment pragmas in newlines
in block comments.
The root issue that I was looking at was a taze directive inside a block
comment in a random typescript file, like:
/* random stuff
* long long long long
* taze
djasper added a comment.
I am bit unsure about the design here. Could we instead match against the
CommentPragmas and then not even create a BreakableToken (or reflow) if that
matches?
I guess that would make us unable to reflow if only part of the comment is a
pragma, but that seems ok (for n
