djasper added inline comments.
================ Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:155 + Next->startsSequence(tok::identifier, tok::l_square, + tok::numeric_constant, tok::r_square, + tok::r_paren, tok::l_paren))) { ---------------- benhamilton wrote: > benhamilton wrote: > > djasper wrote: > > > benhamilton wrote: > > > > djasper wrote: > > > > > This seems suspect. Does it have to be a numeric_constant? > > > > Probably not, any constexpr would do, I suspect. What's the best way to > > > > parse that? > > > I think this is the same answer for both of your questions. If what you > > > are trying to prevent "FOO(^)" to be parsed as a block, wouldn't it be > > > enough to look for whether there is a "(" after the ")" or even only > > > after "(^)", everything else is already correct IIUC? That would get you > > > out of need to parse the specifics here, which will be hard. > > > > > > Or thinking about it another way. Previously, every "(^" would be parsed > > > as an ObjC block. There seems to be only a really rare corner case in > > > which it isn't (macros). Thus, I'd just try to detect that corner case. > > > Instead you are completely inverting the defaults (defaulting to "^" is > > > not a block) and then try to exactly parse ObjC where there might be many > > > cases and edge cases that you won't even think of now. > > Hmm. Well, it's not just `FOO(^);` that isn't a block: > > > > ``` > > #define FOO(X) operator X > > > > SomeType FOO(^)(int x, const SomeType& y) { ... } > > ``` > > > > Obviously we can't get this perfect without a pre-processor, but it seems > > like our best bet is to only assign mark `TT_ObjCBlockLParen` when we are > > sure the syntax is a valid block type or block variable. > I tried the suggestion to only treat `(^)(` as a block type, but it appears > this is the primary place where we set `TT_ObjCBlockLParen`, so I think we > really do need to handle the other cases here. I don't follow your logic. I'd like you to slowly change this as opposed to completely going the opposite way. So currently, the only know real-live problem is "FOO(^);". So address this somehow, but still default/error to recognizing too much stuff as a block. Have you actually seen SomeType FOO(^)(int x, const SomeType& y) { ... } in real code? Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D43906 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits