Typz added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37813#1184051, @klimek wrote:
> The problem here is that we have different opinions on how the formatting on
> namespace macros should behave in the first place- I think they should behave
> like namespaces, you want them to be formatted differently.
> Given that you want full control over the formatting of those macros, and
> them not actually be formatted exactly like namespaces or classes, I think we
> need a more generic mechanism for you to express that.
Not sure what you mean here. I want them to behave like namespaces as well,
this is actually the use case I have... As implemented, they indeed behave
exactly like namespaces :
TESTSUITE(a) { namespace a {
} // TESTSUITE(a) } // namespace a
VS
TESTSUITE(a) { TESTSUITE(b) { namespace a { namespace b {
} // TESTSUITE(a::b) }} // namespace a::b
(as long as there is a single argument. When multiple arguments are used, I add
to choose a heuristic...)
As far as I understand, the divergence is that you would want something to
"match" the implementation of the macro, while I propose a simpler heuristic,
which should work fine for namespaces...
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37813
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
