poiru added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:509
@@ +508,3 @@
+ Tok->Previous->MatchingParen->Previous &&
+ Tok->Previous->MatchingParen->Previous->is(tok::kw_operator)) {
+ Tok->Previous->MatchingParen->Type = TT_OverloadedOperator;
----------------
djasper wrote:
> Why is this last check important? To not mark operator()()()? Is that
> important?
Probably not, removed.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:1478
@@ -1470,1 +1477,3 @@
+ return false;
+ while (Next && !Next->is(TT_OverloadedOperatorLParen))
Next = Next->Next;
----------------
djasper wrote:
> What kinds of tokens do you expect to consume here? Would it be better to be
> more strict, i.e. consume exactly an operator, "new", "delete", "()" and such?
Done.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:1492
@@ +1491,3 @@
+ Next = Next->Next;
+ while (Next && !Next->is(TT_OverloadedOperatorLParen))
+ Next = Next->Next;
----------------
djasper wrote:
> This is very similar to the above. What are the exact differences (maybe add
> a comment)? Could we factor some of this out into a local function or a
> lambda?
Done.
================
Comment at: lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:2187
@@ -2161,1 +2186,3 @@
return true;
+ if (Right.is(tok::kw_operator))
+ return !Left.is(tok::coloncolon);
----------------
djasper wrote:
> I think this is incorrect as we currently break after the coloncolon if a
> nested name specifier has to be split, e.g.:
>
> void AssumeThisIsAVeryLongTypeOrSetASmallColumnLimit::
> operator+() {
> }
>
Removed this bit, thanks.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D11177
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
