Tags: patch

Tags: patch


I found that the coumpounded statements are anchored to the wrong object
when 1. the compound is not at beginning-of-line and 2. it is not
preceeded by a construct such as fndecl/for/if/while/etc., which differs
from how c-mode indents it.

Non-BOL compound statements is actually quite common with macros and
testing frameworks (see the test case). For example, you want this to
indent:

TEST_CASE(1) {
    assert (...);
}

The heuristic is quite course - it simply checks if the grandparent is
function-definition or not, which is really if this node is a top-level
sibling in the function body.  If that is the case, the old rules should
apply and standalone-parent should be the guide; otherwise, it should be
the parent-BOL. This feels a bit shaky but does seem to work well for
the test cases, and can be refined in the future.