MyDeveloperDay added a comment. In D151761#4400056 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151761#4400056>, @galenelias wrote:
> In D151761#4394758 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D151761#4394758>, > @MyDeveloperDay wrote: > >> did you consider a case where the case falls through? (i.e. no return) >> >> "case log::info : return \"info\";\n" >> "case log::warning :\n" >> "default : return \"default\";\n" > > That's a great point. I didn't really consider this, and currently this > particular case won't align the case statements if they have an empty case > block, however if you had some tokens (e.g. `// fallthrough`) it would. It's > not immediately clear to me what the expectation would be. I guess to align > as if there was an invisible trailing token, but it's a bit awkward if the > cases missing a body are the 'long' cases that push out the alignment. Also, > I don't think it's possible to use `AlignTokens` and get this behavior, as > there is no token on those lines to align, so it's not straightforward to > handle. I guess I'll be curious to see if there is feedback or cases where > this behavior is desired, and if so, I can look into adding that > functionality later. Since right now it would involve a completely custom > AlignTokens clone, my preference would be to just leave this as not supported. Can you add a unit test with a // fallthough comment, and a /* FALLTHROUGH */ and [[fallthrough]] so we know whats going to happen in those cases at a minimum. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D151761/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D151761 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
