================
Comment at: clang-tidy/llvm/NamespaceCommentCheck.cpp:66
@@ +65,3 @@
+ Token Tok;
+ while (Lexer::getRawToken(Loc, Tok, Sources, Result.Context->getLangOpts()))
{
+ Loc = Loc.getLocWithOffset(1);
----------------
Manuel Klimek wrote:
> Can you add a comment explaining why it's ok to retry on failure with an
> incremented location?
Done.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/llvm/NamespaceCommentCheck.cpp:73
@@ +72,3 @@
+ bool NextTokenIsOnSameLine = Sources.getSpellingLineNumber(Loc) == EndLine;
+ bool NeedLineBreak = NextTokenIsOnSameLine && Tok.isNot(tok::eof);
+
----------------
Manuel Klimek wrote:
> Can you explain why we need this? (I'd have expected the fix-it to not change
> the number of newlines, thus just inserting the comment between the } and the
> newline).
We need it for the case where the next token after '}' is on the same line (see
the test cases on lines 17 and 32 of unittests/clang-tidy/LLVMModuleTest.cpp).
http://reviews.llvm.org/D3825
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
