In clang-format, multiline templates have the `>` on the same line as
the last parameter:
```c++
template <
typename Foo,
typename Bar>
void foo() {
```
I would like to add an option to put the `>` on the next line, like
this:
```c++
template <
typename Foo,
typename Bar
>
void foo() {
```
An example of a large project that uses this style is NVIDIA's CUTLASS,
here is an example:
https://github.com/NVIDIA/cutlass/blob/main/include/cutlass/epilogue/dispatch_policy.hpp#L149-L156
My reasoning is that it reminds me of this style of braces:
```c++
if (foo()) {
bar();
baz();}
```
Most people agree this is better:
```c++
if (foo()) {
bar();
baz();
}
```
---------
Co-authored-by: Owen Pan <owenpiano@gmail.com>
Fix an issue where the lambda body left brace could sometimes fail to be
wrapped when AllowShortLambdasOnASingleLine is enabled.
Now, when BraceWrapping.BeforeLambdaBody is enabled, if the brace is not
wrapped, we prevent breaks in the lambda body.
Resolves#81845
Fixes a long-standing bug that erroneously placed function arguments on a
new line despite all arguments being able to fit on the same line.
The original diff that introduced the bug implemented behaviour that pushed
the first argument to a function onto a new line under certain circumstances
relating passing lambdas as arguments.
This behaviour was implemented in TokenAnnotator::mustBreakBefore() which
meant the code lacked the necessary context to figure out whether subsequent
arguments might be able to all fit on one line. As such, I've moved the
implementation to ContinuationIndenter and, instead of forcing a line break
at the first argument in all cases, we now allow the OptimizingLineFormatter
to consider placing the first argument on the same line as the function call
but don't allow further line breaks in this case.
The end result is that either the first argument must go on a new line (as
before) or all arguments must be put on the current line.
Closes#44486.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D156259
This style is similar to AlwaysBreak, but places closing brackets on new lines.
For example, if you have a multiline parameter list, clang-format currently only supports breaking per-parameter, but places the closing bracket on the line of the last parameter.
Function(
param1,
param2,
param3);
A style supported by other code styling tools (e.g. rustfmt) is to allow the closing brackets to be placed on their own line, aiding the user in being able to quickly infer the bounds of the block of code.
Function(
param1,
param2,
param3
);
For prior work on a similar feature, see: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33029.
Note: This currently only supports block indentation for closing parentheses.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109557
Summary:
Even when BreakBeforeBinaryOperators is set, AlignOperands kept
aligning the beginning of the line, even when it could align the
actual operands (e.g. after an assignment).
With this patch, the operands are actually aligned, and the operator
gets aligned with the equal sign:
int aaaaa = bbbbbb
+ cccccc;
This not happen in tests, to avoid 'breaking' the indentation:
if (aaaaa
&& bbbbb)
return;
Reviewers: krasimir, djasper, klimek, MyDeveloperDay
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay
Subscribers: MyDeveloperDay, acoomans, cfe-commits, klimek
Tags: #clang, #clang-format
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32478
Summary:
When multiple ternary operators are chained, e.g. like an if/else-if/
else-if/.../else sequence, clang-format will keep aligning the colon
with the question mark, which increases the indent for each
conditionals:
int a = condition1 ? result1
: condition2 ? result2
: condition3 ? result3
: result4;
This patch detects the situation (e.g. conditionals used in false branch
of another conditional), to avoid indenting in that case:
int a = condition1 ? result1
: condition2 ? result2
: condition3 ? result3
: result4;
When BreakBeforeTernaryOperators is false, this will format like this:
int a = condition1 ? result1 :
condition2 ? result2 :
conditino3 ? result3 :
result4;
This formatting style is referenced here:
https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/02/27/replace-else-if-ternary-operator/
and here:
https://marcmutz.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/top-5-reasons-you-should-love-your-ternary-operator/
Reviewers: krasimir, djasper, klimek, MyDeveloperDay
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay
Subscribers: hokein, dyung, MyDeveloperDay, acoomans, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang, #clang-format
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D50078
Summary:
Even when BreakBeforeBinaryOperators is set, AlignOperands kept
aligning the beginning of the line, even when it could align the
actual operands (e.g. after an assignment).
With this patch, there is an option to actually align the operands, so
that the operator gets right-aligned with the equal sign or return
operator:
int aaaaa = bbbbbb
+ cccccc;
return aaaaaaa
&& bbbbbbb;
This not happen in parentheses, to avoid 'breaking' the indentation:
if (aaaaa
&& bbbbb)
return;
Reviewers: krasimir, djasper
Subscribers: cfe-commits, klimek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D32478
When multiple ternary operators are chained, e.g. like an if/else-if/
else-if/.../else sequence, clang-format will keep aligning the colon
with the question mark, which increases the indent for each
conditionals:
int a = condition1 ? result1
: condition2 ? result2
: condition3 ? result3
: result4;
This patch detects the situation (e.g. conditionals used in false branch
of another conditional), to avoid indenting in that case:
int a = condition1 ? result1
: condition2 ? result2
: condition3 ? result3
: result4;
When BreakBeforeTernaryOperators is false, this will format like this:
int a = condition1 ? result1 :
condition2 ? result2 :
conditino3 ? result3 :
result4;
Summary:
Use spaces instead of tabs for alignment with UT_ForContinuationAndIndentation to make the code aligned for any tab/indent width.
Fixes https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38381
Reviewed By: MyDeveloperDay
Patch By: fickert
Tags: #clang-format
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75034
Summary:
Align sequential generic type constraints on a type.
Indent sequential generic type constraints on different types as continuations.
Do not allow '(' and '<' within a generic type constraint to open new scopes.
Reviewers: krasimir
Subscribers: cfe-commits, MyDeveloperDay
Tags: #clang-format, #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76597
Summary:
Currently clang-format uses ContinuationIndent to indent the contents of a raw
string literal that is the last parameter of the function call. This is to
achieve formatting similar to trailing:
```
f(1, 2, R"pb(
x: y)pb");
```
However this had the unfortunate consequence of producing format like this:
```
fffffff(1, 2,
R"pb(
a: b
)pb");
```
This patch makes clang-format consider indenting a trailing raw string param
after a newline based off the start of the format delimiter, producing:
```
fffffff(1, 2,
R"pb(
a: b
)pb");
```
Reviewers: djasper
Reviewed By: djasper
Subscribers: cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D60558
llvm-svn: 358689
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
This patch makes `getLengthToMatchingParen` respect the `BreakBeforeClosingBrace`
ParenState for matching scope closers. In order to distinguish between paren states
introduced by real vs. fake parens, I've added the token opening the ParensState
to that struct.
Reviewers: djasper
Reviewed By: djasper
Subscribers: klimek, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46519
llvm-svn: 331857
This is similar to the LLVM change https://reviews.llvm.org/D46290.
We've been running doxygen with the autobrief option for a couple of
years now. This makes the \brief markers into our comments
redundant. Since they are a visual distraction and we don't want to
encourage more \brief markers in new code either, this patch removes
them all.
Patch produced by
for i in $(git grep -l '\@brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\@brief //g' $i & done
for i in $(git grep -l '\\brief'); do perl -pi -e 's/\\brief //g' $i & done
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46320
llvm-svn: 331834
Summary:
Concatenating Objective-C string literals inside an array literal
raises the warning -Wobjc-string-concatenation (which is enabled by default).
clang-format currently splits and concatenates string literals like
the following:
NSArray *myArray = @[ @"aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" ];
into:
NSArray *myArray =
@[ @"aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"
@"aaaaaaaaa" ];
which raises the warning. This is https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36153 .
The options I can think of to fix this are:
1) Have clang-format disable Wobjc-string-concatenation by emitting
pragmas around the formatted code
2) Have clang-format wrap the string literals in a macro (which
disables the warning)
3) Disable string splitting for Objective-C string literals inside
array literals
I think 1) has no precedent, and I couldn't find a good
identity() macro for 2). So, this diff implements 3).
Test Plan: make -j12 FormatTests && ./tools/clang/unittests/Format/FormatTests
Reviewers: jolesiak, stephanemoore, djasper
Reviewed By: jolesiak
Subscribers: klimek, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D42704
llvm-svn: 324618
When we break a long line like:
Column limit: 21
|
// foo foo foo foo foo foo foo foo foo foo foo foo
The local decision when to allow protruding vs. breaking can lead to this
outcome (2 excess characters, 2 breaks):
// foo foo foo foo foo
// foo foo foo foo foo
// foo foo
While strictly staying within the column limit leads to this strictly better
outcome (fully below the column limit, 2 breaks):
// foo foo foo foo
// foo foo foo foo
// foo foo foo foo
To get an optimal solution, we would need to consider all combinations of excess
characters vs. breaking for all lines, but that would lead to a significant
increase in the search space of the algorithm for little gain.
Instead, we blindly try both approches and·select the one that leads to the
overall lower penalty.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40605
llvm-svn: 319541
Create more orthogonal pieces. The restructuring made it easy to try out
several alternatives to D33589, and while none of the alternatives
turned out to be the right solution, the underlying simplification of
the structure is helpful.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39900
llvm-svn: 318141
Summary:
This patch enables `BreakableToken` to manage the formatting of non-trailing
block comments. It is a refinement of https://reviews.llvm.org/D37007.
We discovered that the optimizer outsmarts us on cases where breaking the comment
costs considerably less than breaking after the comment. This patch addresses
this by ensuring that a newline is inserted between a block comment and the next
token.
Reviewers: djasper
Reviewed By: djasper
Subscribers: cfe-commits, klimek
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37695
llvm-svn: 315893
The main motivation behind this is to cleanup the WhitespaceManager and
make it more extensible for future alignment etc. features.
Specifically, WhitespaceManager has started to copy more and more code
that is already present in FormatToken. Instead, I think it makes more
sense to actually store a reference to each FormatToken for each change.
This has as a consequence led to a change in the calculation of indent
levels. Now, we actually compute them for each Token ahead of time,
which should be more efficient as it removes an unsigned value for the
ParenState, which is used during the combinatorial exploration of the
solution space.
No functional changes intended.
Review: https://reviews.llvm.org/D29300
llvm-svn: 293616
Before:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaa, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa::
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
After:
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa(aaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa::
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa,
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa);
No new test cases, as the existing ones cover this fairly well.
llvm-svn: 292110
I have not succeeded in writing a proper test case for this yet and we
also need to solve the underlying fundamental problem of trying too
many combinations with nested blocks (basically this somewhat works
around our Dijkstra algorithm). Preventing this linebreak is good
anyways as usually the penalties never make us choose it (that's why I
can't create a test) and it also looks ugly.
Also cleaned up state comparison code that I discovered while hunting
this down.
llvm-svn: 239398
Previously this was only used for JavaScript.
Before:
functionCall({
int i;
int j;
},
aaaa, bbbb, cccc);
After:
functionCall({
int i;
int j;
}, aaaa, bbbb, cccc);
llvm-svn: 222531
Before:
if (aaaaaaaa && bbbbbbbbbbbbbbb // need to wrap
== cccccccccccccc) ...
After:
if (aaaaaaaa
&& bbbbbbbbbbbbbbb // need to wrap
== cccccccccccccc) ...
The same rule has already be implemented for BreakBeforeBinaryOperators
set to false in r205527.
llvm-svn: 206159
Especially try to keep existing line breaks before raw string literals,
as the code author might have aligned content to it.
Thereby, clang-format now keeps things like:
parseStyle(R"(
BasedOnStyle: Google,
ColumnLimit: 100)");
parseStyle(
R"(BasedOnStyle: Google,
ColumnLimit: 100)");
llvm-svn: 197368
