blob: 877b6670c5fa160f9e687627f05967a9958c9c8e (
plain) (
blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
|
[
(compound_statement)
(declaration_list)
(field_declaration_list)
(enumerator_list)
(parameter_list)
(init_declarator)
(expression_statement)
] @indent
[
"case"
"}"
"]"
")"
] @outdent
(if_statement
consequence: (_) @indent
(#not-kind-eq? @indent "compound_statement")
(#set! "scope" "all"))
(while_statement
body: (_) @indent
(#not-kind-eq? @indent "compound_statement")
(#set! "scope" "all"))
(do_statement
body: (_) @indent
(#not-kind-eq? @indent "compound_statement")
(#set! "scope" "all"))
(for_statement
")"
(_) @indent
(#not-kind-eq? @indent "compound_statement")
(#set! "scope" "all"))
(parameter_list
. (parameter_declaration) @anchor
(#set! "scope" "tail")) @align
(argument_list
. (_) @anchor
(#set! "scope" "tail")) @align
; These are a bit opinionated since some people just indent binary/ternary expressions spanning multiple lines.
; Since they are only triggered when a newline is inserted into an already complete binary/ternary expression,
; this should happen rarely, so it is not a big deal either way.
; Additionally, adding these queries has the advantage of preventing such continuation lines from being used
; as the baseline when the `hybrid` indent heuristic is used (which is desirable since their indentation is so inconsistent).
(binary_expression
(#set! "scope" "tail")) @anchor @align
(conditional_expression
"?" @anchor
(#set! "scope" "tail")) @align
|
