ksyx added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparator.cpp:134
+ OperateIndex + 1 < Lines.size()) {
+ // UnwrappedLineParser's recognition of free-standing macro like
+ // Q_OBJECT may also recognize some uppercased type names that may be
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> Shouldn't we set a type for such cases instead of repeating the detection
> code here?
Here I actually did a few more checks to limit the impact to the minimum but I
am happy to do that if that's necessary.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparator.cpp:135
+ // UnwrappedLineParser's recognition of free-standing macro like
+ // Q_OBJECT may also recognize some uppercased type names that may be
+ // used as return type as that kind of macros, which is a bit hard to
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> As a Qt user who also wants to use your patch, please add a test for that
> case. ;)
For `Q_OBJECT` if used as pattern like this:
```
class X : ... {
Q_OBJECT
public:
// ...
}
```
I think this patch has no effect on this? The comment here is just a repetition
of that in unwrapped parser
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/DefinitionBlockSeparatorTest.cpp:143
+ "\n"
+ " LONGTYPENAME\n"
+ " Foobar(int t, int p) {\n"
----------------
HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> Maybe really use HRESULT? People will know what that should be.
It actually does not matter what type name it is as long as it is an identifier
with >=5 characters and all uppercased
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D117520/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D117520
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
