jbcoe marked an inline comment as done.
jbcoe added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTestCSharp.cpp:246
- " get;\n"
- "}");
----------------
MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> Nit: I feel like this layout should really be an option, (maybe for the
> future).
>
> When we originally did the C# work, we did say we might want in the future to
> add options that might be specific like laying out the accessors
>
> I think VS has support for formatting them as either
>
> ```
> public int Goo { set; get; }
> ```
>
> and
>
> ```
> public int Goo
> {
> set; get;
> }
> ```
>
> and the following is equally valid in my eyes
>
> ```
> public int Goo
> {
> set;
> get;
> }
> ```
>
> as well as what is being proposed here of
>
> ```
> public int Goo
> { set; get; }
> ```
>
> I'm not completely sure how much the other options are controlling this at
> present and how much is not in the control of your merging
>
> and how does that change when there is actually code in the setter and getter?
>
>
>
Agreed that this should be configured by an option in a future revision.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75006/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D75006
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
