djasper added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/ContinuationIndenter.cpp:904
+ : State.Stack.back().Indent);
if (NextNonComment->LongestObjCSelectorName == 0)
+ return MinIndent;
----------------
benhamilton wrote:
> djasper wrote:
> > Does this if actually change the behavior in any way? With
> > LongestObjCSelectorName being 0, isn't that:
> >
> > return MinIndent +
> > std::max(0, ColumnWidth) - ColumnWidth;
> >
> > (and with ColumnWidth being >= 0, this should be just MinIndent)
> The `- ColumnWidth` part is only for the case where `LongestObjCSelectorName`
> is *not* 0. If it's 0, we return `MinIndent` which ensures we obey
> `Style.IndentWrappedFunctionNames`.
>
> The problem with the code before this diff is when `LongestObjCSelectorName`
> was 0, we ignored `Style.IndentWrappedFunctionNames` and always returned
> `State.Stack.back().Indent` regardless of that setting.
>
> After this diff, when `LongestObjCSelectorName` is 0 (i.e., this is either
> the first part of the selector or a selector which is not colon-aligned due
> to block formatting), we change the behavior to indent to at least
> `State.FirstIndent + Style.ContinuationIndentWidth`, like all other
> indentation logic in this file.
>
> I've added some comments explaining what's going on, since this code is quite
> complex.
I am not saying your change is wrong. And I might be getting out of practice
with coding. My question is, what changes if you remove lines 906 and 907 (the
"if (...) return MinIndent")?
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D44994
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
