HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp:3052 + // & 1 + if (Right.Tok.isLiteral()) + return true; ---------------- MyDeveloperDay wrote: > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote: > > Is this valid code? Or did we just wrongly assign PointerOrReference? I'd > > say after that there can not be a literal in valid code, thus we do not > > need to handle it. > Ok so as you see I broken out the compound statement, to be honest I find > these compound if's unreadable and I can't for the life of me work out what > case they are trying to handle. (I want to do this more).. > > Please no one say doing it separately is slower! without measuring it..we are > talking ns difference if anything at all. > > I agree I truly believe we are mis assigning > PointerOrReference/BinaryOperator this as I mentioned in > https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2021-December/069486.html is a major > issue and I think from time to time these rules try to correct that > situation, in this case & is the logical operation on a reference. I'm with you to split up these monsters! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115050/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115050 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
