aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/llvm/lib/Analysis/ModuleSummaryAnalysis.cpp
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorEmilia Dreamer <emilia@rymiel.space>2023-03-26 04:37:59 +0300
committerEmilia Dreamer <emilia@rymiel.space>2023-03-26 04:38:26 +0300
commit5409fb38372dbf65a94725ccefab2b993fbb7a9b (patch)
treec98f6333b5f6450bf0d49ec10284ca7119117960 /llvm/lib/Analysis/ModuleSummaryAnalysis.cpp
parentcd67bbdc2496fbba68c818c6ff82007d89d2bb40 (diff)
downloadllvm-5409fb38372dbf65a94725ccefab2b993fbb7a9b.zip
llvm-5409fb38372dbf65a94725ccefab2b993fbb7a9b.tar.gz
llvm-5409fb38372dbf65a94725ccefab2b993fbb7a9b.tar.bz2
[clang-format] Annotate lambdas with requires clauses.
The C++ grammar allows lambdas to have a *requires-clause* in two places, either directly after the *template-parameter-list*, such as: `[] <typename T> requires foo<T> (T t) { ... };` Or, at the end of the *lambda-declarator* (before the lambda's body): `[] <typename T> (T t) requires foo<T> { ... };` Previously, these cases weren't handled at all, resulting in weird results. Note that this commit only handles token annotation, so the actual formatting still ends up suboptimal. This is mostly because I do not yet know how to approach making the requires clause formatting of lambdas match the formatting for functions. Fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/61269 Reviewed By: HazardyKnusperkeks, owenpan Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D145642
Diffstat (limited to 'llvm/lib/Analysis/ModuleSummaryAnalysis.cpp')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions