Thanks for your comments Alex.
Comments inline.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/BracesAroundStatementsCheck.cpp:57
@@ +56,3 @@
+SourceLocation
+forwardSkipWhitespacesAndComments(const SourceManager &SM,
+ const clang::ASTContext *Context,
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> s/Whitespaces/Whitespace/
Ok.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/BracesAroundStatementsCheck.cpp:74
@@ +73,3 @@
+
+} // end anonymous namespace
+
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> nit: I'd prefer "// namespace" for consistency with how the
> llvm-namespace-comment check does it.
Ok.
================
Comment at: clang-tidy/misc/BracesAroundStatementsCheck.cpp:96
@@ +95,3 @@
+ SourceLocation StartLoc =
+ backwardSkipWhitespacesAndComments(
+ *Result.SourceManager, Result.Context,
WS->getBody()->getLocStart())
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> I think, RParenLoc should be stored inside WhileStmt and IfStmt, then this
> code will be much easier. This doesn't have to be in this patch, but please
> add a FIXME.
Ok for a FIXME.
I'd prefer creating a new patch for this, as this can have wider repercussions,
not only on clang-tidy.
================
Comment at: test/clang-tidy/misc-braces-around-statements.cpp:147
@@ +146,3 @@
+ // CHECK-FIXES: if (cond("ifif2")) {
+ // CHECK-FIXES: /*comment*/ ;}} // comment
+
----------------
alexfh wrote:
> This looks slightly wrong to put a closing brace before a trailing comment,
> and clang-format won't fix this. I think, the check should try to keep the
> trailing comment next to the statement it belongs to. I'm not sure if there
> can be a 100% fool-proof solution, but I hope, we can come up with a decent
> heuristic.
>
> Assuming the coding style is similar to the one used in LLVM, we could do the
> following:
>
> 1. if there's a corresponding "else" or "while", the check should insert "}
> " right before that token.
> 2. if there's a multi-line block comment starting on the same line after
> the location we're inserting the closing brace at, or there's a non-comment
> token, the check should insert "} " right before that token.
> 3. otherwise the check should find the end of line (possibly after some
> block or line comments) and insert "}\n" right after that EOL. It could also
> insert some spaces to make the indentation nice, but this could be done by
> clang-format as well.
>
> Do you see any problems with this plan?
Looks like a plan!
1. is trivial (already done), 2. and 3. should be quite easy too.
In 3. I would leave indentation to clang-format, anyway one should run it after
using clang-tidy.
Is there any easy way of checking if a block-comment spans over multiple lines?
http://reviews.llvm.org/D5395
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
