[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
Closed by commit rG8b48d2437320: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine 
keywords as unary operator to avoid… (authored by ChuanqiXu).

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

Files:
  clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
  clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // Check that * is not treated as a binary operator when we set 
PointerAlignment
+  // as PAS_Left after a keyword and not a declaration.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1964,6 +1964,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, 
tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // Check that * is not treated as a binary operator when we set PointerAlignment
+  // as PAS_Left after a keyword and not a declaration.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1964,6 +1964,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D91245#2454610 , @MyDeveloperDay 
wrote:

> I don't like seeing users having to use ```// clang-format off```
>
>   auto try_sequence = [](int& ref) -> return_ignore {
>   /* clang-format off */
>   for co_await(int v : return_random_int())
>   ref = v;
>   /* clang-format on*/
>   };
>
> it would be nice if we could land a co_routines improvement

From the links, I find most of them are test cases of LLVM projects. But I 
agree with you that `/* clang-format off */` looks ugly. And I find that the 
grammar `for co_await ()` is missing in newer standard documentation (N4849) 
while it was there in N4680. Maybe it is necessary to check whether this 
grammar is abandoned.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added a comment.

I don't like seeing users having to use ```// clang-format off```

  auto try_sequence = [](int& ref) -> return_ignore {
  /* clang-format off */
  for co_await(int v : return_random_int())
  ref = v;
  /* clang-format on*/
  };

it would be nice if we could land a co_routines improvement


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added a comment.

not that rare it seems

https://github.com/search?q=%22co_return+%28%22&type=code
https://github.com/search?q=%22for+co_await+%28%22&type=code


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D91245#2454504 , @MyDeveloperDay 
wrote:

> Aside: Would you be prepared to take a look at D34225: [clang-format] Teach 
> clang-format how to handle C++ coroutines  
> which is pretty much been abandoned, and see if there is anything there that 
> might help the co_routinues support?

I think the test cases in D34225: [clang-format] Teach clang-format how to 
handle C++ coroutines  are rare in our codes. 
It is a little strange to write `co_return (43)` instead of `co_return 43`. And 
the grammar `for co_await (auto x : range)` is used rarely. I think both of 
them  are defects of clang-format while they are really rare in actual 
environments.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added a comment.

Aside: Would you be prepared to take a look at D34225: [clang-format] Teach 
clang-format how to handle C++ coroutines  
which is pretty much been abandoned, and see if there is anything there that 
might help the co_routinues support?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7759-7761
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.

MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > ChuanqiXu wrote:
> > > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > > I don't think this should be in the tests, because it is not true (if 
> > > > your patch works).
> > > I'm confusing about your comment. What is not true? Do you mean if my 
> > > patch works then the `co_return *a;` should be formatted as `co_return* 
> > > a`?
> > No, I refer to the comment. You say `would mis-format`, but it wouln't 
> > because of your change, or not? Otherwise the tests would not pass.
> 
Oh, I got it. Thanks!


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu updated this revision to Diff 311849.
ChuanqiXu added a comment.

Edit the comment to avoid misleading.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

Files:
  clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
  clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // Check that * is not treated as a binary operator when we set 
PointerAlignment
+  // as PAS_Left after a keyword and not a declaration.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, 
tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // Check that * is not treated as a binary operator when we set PointerAlignment
+  // as PAS_Left after a keyword and not a declaration.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7759-7761
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.

HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> ChuanqiXu wrote:
> > HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > > I don't think this should be in the tests, because it is not true (if 
> > > your patch works).
> > I'm confusing about your comment. What is not true? Do you mean if my patch 
> > works then the `co_return *a;` should be formatted as `co_return* a`?
> No, I refer to the comment. You say `would mis-format`, but it wouln't 
> because of your change, or not? Otherwise the tests would not pass.



CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Björn Schäpers via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7759-7761
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.

ChuanqiXu wrote:
> HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> > I don't think this should be in the tests, because it is not true (if your 
> > patch works).
> I'm confusing about your comment. What is not true? Do you mean if my patch 
> works then the `co_return *a;` should be formatted as `co_return* a`?
No, I refer to the comment. You say `would mis-format`, but it wouln't because 
of your change, or not? Otherwise the tests would not pass.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7759-7761
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.

HazardyKnusperkeks wrote:
> I don't think this should be in the tests, because it is not true (if your 
> patch works).
I'm confusing about your comment. What is not true? Do you mean if my patch 
works then the `co_return *a;` should be formatted as `co_return* a`?


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Björn Schäpers via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

HazardyKnusperkeks added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7759-7761
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.

I don't think this should be in the tests, because it is not true (if your 
patch works).


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu updated this revision to Diff 311789.
ChuanqiXu added a comment.

add `verifyFormat("return *a", PASLeftStyle);` to clarify the change


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

Files:
  clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
  clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,16 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, 
tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,16 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added inline comments.



Comment at: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp:7766
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
 }

maybe add, just to clarify it.

verifyFormat("return *a", PASLeftStyle);


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D91245#2437741 , @Quuxplusone wrote:

> Peanut gallery says: It seems to me that your root problem here is that 
> `co_yield` is not being recognized by the parser as a keyword, and so you're 
> seeing e.g. `co_yield* p;` the same way you'd see `CoYield* p;`.
> But in that case, you should also be seeing `co_yield -1;` formatted as 
> `co_yield - 1;` the same way you'd see `CoYield - 1;`.
> Is it possible that you're not using the right (C++20) language mode? (OTOH, 
> see D69144 , D69180 
> , which //also// didn't concern themselves 
> with language modes. I don't understand why not.)
>
> Could you please re-upload the diff with context (i.e. `git show -U999`)?

Yes, it looks like that `co_yield` is not being recognized as keywords. I use 
the `Auto` for Standard attribute in `.clang-format` config file. And `co*` 
would be recognized as keywords. From my point of view, I first find that the 
keyword `return`  was processed specifically in the line 1962 in 
`TokenAnnotator.cpp` which recognize `return` as Unary Operator. So I choose to 
recognize `co*` keywords as Unary Operators to solve the format problem.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu updated this revision to Diff 311485.
ChuanqiXu added a comment.

Re-upload patch with context


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

Files:
  clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
  clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, 
tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,


Index: clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
===
--- clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
+++ clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp
@@ -7755,6 +7755,15 @@
 
   verifyFormat("co_yield -1;");
   verifyFormat("co_return -1;");
+
+  // The default setting for PointerAlignment is PAS_Right.
+  // But if we set PointerAlignment as PAS_Left, the formatter
+  // would mis-format the pointer alignment.
+  FormatStyle PASLeftStyle = getLLVMStyle();
+  PASLeftStyle.PointerAlignment = FormatStyle::PAS_Left;
+  verifyFormat("co_return *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_await *a;", PASLeftStyle);
+  verifyFormat("co_yield *a", PASLeftStyle);
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, DoesNotIndentRelativeToUnaryOperators) {
Index: clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
===
--- clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
+++ clang/lib/Format/TokenAnnotator.cpp
@@ -1960,6 +1960,7 @@
 
 if (PrevToken->isOneOf(tok::l_paren, tok::l_square, tok::l_brace,
tok::comma, tok::semi, tok::kw_return, tok::colon,
+   tok::kw_co_return, tok::kw_co_await, tok::kw_co_yield,
tok::equal, tok::kw_delete, tok::kw_sizeof,
tok::kw_throw) ||
 PrevToken->isOneOf(TT_BinaryOperator, TT_ConditionalExpr,
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Chuanqi Xu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D91245#2437518 , @MyDeveloperDay 
wrote:

> What does `the behavior goes wrong` mean? why can't it be left aligned?

Because when we use PointerAlignment attribute, I think we mean that the 
pointer need to be aligned in declarations. However,  `co_return *a;` is not a 
declaration.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[Arthur O'Dwyer via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

Quuxplusone added a comment.

Peanut gallery says: It seems to me that your root problem here is that 
`co_yield` is not being recognized by the parser as a keyword, and so you're 
seeing e.g. `co_yield* p;` the same way you'd see `CoYield* p;`.
But in that case, you should also be seeing `co_yield -1;` formatted as 
`co_yield - 1;` the same way you'd see `CoYield - 1;`.
Is it possible that you're not using the right (C++20) language mode? (OTOH, 
see D69144 , D69180 
, which //also// didn't concern themselves 
with language modes. I don't understand why not.)

Could you please re-upload the diff with context (i.e. `git show -U999`)?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D91245: [clang-format] Recognize c++ coroutine keywords as unary operator to avoid misleading pointer alignment

[MyDeveloperDay via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

MyDeveloperDay added a comment.

What does `the behavior goes wrong` mean? why can't it be left aligned?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D91245

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits