Open jakubtomsu opened 4 months ago
Here is an example of code which has very broken formatting:
Indirect_Array :: struct($Num: int, $Index, $Gen, $Val: typeid) #align(64) where intrinsics.type_is_integer(Index) && Num > 0 && (1 << (size_of(Index) * 8) >= Num) && (size_of(Gen) == 0 || intrinsics.type_is_unsigned(Gen)) { len: Index, pool: Pool(Num, Index, Gen, Index), indexes: [Num]Index, values: [Num]Val, invalid_value: Val, }
Which formats into:
Indirect_Array :: struct($Num: int, $Index, $Gen, $Val: typeid,) #align (64) where intrinsics.type_is_integer(Index) && Num > 0 && (1 << (size_of(Index) * 8) >= Num) && (size_of(Gen) == 0 || intrinsics.type_is_unsigned(Gen)) { len: Index, pool: Pool(Num, Index, Gen, Index), indexes: [Num]Index, values: [Num]Val, invalid_value: Val, }
Notice the additional comma after the struct args, and the field types on a new line.
Yeah don't think that is even really implemented. It'll most likely have to be treated like the procedures.
Here is an example of code which has very broken formatting:
Which formats into:
Notice the additional comma after the struct args, and the field types on a new line.