- User Since
- Nov 12 2020, 2:35 AM (10 w, 4 d)
Do you need someone to push this? If so please post email and name to use for the commit.
I did not re-accept this, because of the script change. I'm okay with it, but I never looked really at the script. I think it should be changed afterwards to error or warn again, but not on this enum. Maybe one could annotate enums which don't have to be fully documented?
Fri, Jan 22
I can push that, but will wait a bit longer so the others have time to object.
Thu, Jan 21
Empty lines removed.
Now with assert.
Wed, Jan 20
Please expand the test case to different options like grouping. Otherwise looks good.
How is it going? I would like to add some new alignment options and it would be stupid not to do it on top of this.
Tue, Jan 19
Is there a test with indentation within a namespace? If not maybe you should add one.
Found and fixed the case when no BasedOnStyle apart from InheritParentConfig is used.
Mon, Jan 18
I think that would have helped me also. I think it's not that easy, but honestly never checked.
- Renamed to InhteritParentConfig
- Reworked to remove the recursion of getStyle
- Now supports the command line style options
- Test cases extended for the latter
- Fixed(?) the last UnitTest, please take a look @krasimir
Sun, Jan 17
Sat, Jan 16
Not what I had in mind, but for me that's okay. I can not say anything to the change of the script though.
Fri, Jan 15
And I don't have a better name.
Thu, Jan 14
I would add a test where you have a member before the first access modifier.
Also this is not exactly what they wanted in the bug, as far as I can see members of structs or classes with no access modifier at all should only be indented once.
Wed, Jan 13
Apart from that last naming issue looks good to me.
Sun, Jan 10
Apart from my inline comment and the pre merge check this is superb. (I will not accept it, until we have reached a conclusion for the documentation.)
Sat, Jan 9
Thu, Jan 7
I think your base for the diff is wrong, there are many "added" things which are already in clang-format. Could you update the diff?
Tue, Jan 5
Mon, Jan 4
Sun, Jan 3
Wed, Dec 30
You should add tests to prove what you are doing.
Tue, Dec 29
Mon, Dec 28
Sun, Dec 27
I've reworked the change to correctly(*) work with line comment sections.
Dec 24 2020
If that's how it's supposed to look, than this patch is fine.
Dec 23 2020
Dec 22 2020
This looks good to me.
Dec 21 2020
So, I've tested a bit:
//= Die ID //~ foo bar //~ EinWort Ein langer Text der fortgesetzt wird //: Dies ist ein langer Kommentar //: der umgebrochen wird tr("Foo");
<message id="Die ID"> <location filename="wid.cpp" line="9"/> <source>Foo</source> <extracomment>Dies ist ein langer Kommentar der umgebrochen wird</extracomment> <translation type="unfinished"></translation> <extra-EinWort>Ein langer Text der fortgesetzt wird</extra-EinWort> <extra-foo>bar</extra-foo> </message>
Dec 18 2020
Test case adapted.
I don't know if this really fixes the problem.
Dec 15 2020
Dec 14 2020
Dec 13 2020
Dec 12 2020
Dec 8 2020
I have only one question, what stands NFC for? I figured something like "no functional change"? But I can't find a definition anywhere.
Dec 7 2020
Dec 6 2020
Dec 4 2020
Why is the file mode changed? As far as I know this makes the file executable? (Disclaimer: I'm a primarly windows user.)