[clang-format] Fix a regression in parsing `switch` in macro call (#114506)

Fixes #114408.

(cherry picked from commit 6ca816f88d5f0f2032d1610207023133eaf40a1e)

diff --git a/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp b/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
index a5268e153bcc5b4e79b4758da7708a8b2a507398..bfb592ae07493843604cefe36aadac85c7eda59c 100644 (file)
--- a/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
+++ b/clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp
@@ -2086,7 +2086,8 @@ void UnwrappedLineParser::parseStructuralElement(
     case tok::kw_switch:
       if (Style.Language == FormatStyle::LK_Java)
         parseSwitch(/*IsExpr=*/true);
-      nextToken();
+      else
+        nextToken();
       break;
     case tok::kw_case:
       // Proto: there are no switch/case statements.
@@ -2637,7 +2638,10 @@ bool UnwrappedLineParser::parseParens(TokenType AmpAmpTokenType) {
         nextToken();
       break;
     case tok::kw_switch:
-      parseSwitch(/*IsExpr=*/true);
+      if (Style.Language == FormatStyle::LK_Java)
+        parseSwitch(/*IsExpr=*/true);
+      else
+        nextToken();
       break;
     case tok::kw_requires: {
       auto RequiresToken = FormatTok;

diff --git a/clang/unittests/Format/TokenAnnotatorTest.cpp b/clang/unittests/Format/TokenAnnotatorTest.cpp
index 4acd900ff061f82dcae1748ef56012641a1b9b7b..07999116ab0cf0b0d81bf3a252a9a2f30b6fcc97 100644 (file)
--- a/clang/unittests/Format/TokenAnnotatorTest.cpp
+++ b/clang/unittests/Format/TokenAnnotatorTest.cpp
@@ -3412,6 +3412,13 @@ TEST_F(TokenAnnotatorTest, TemplateInstantiation) {
   EXPECT_TOKEN(Tokens[18], tok::greater, TT_TemplateCloser);
 }
 
+TEST_F(TokenAnnotatorTest, SwitchInMacroArgument) {
+  auto Tokens = annotate("FOOBAR(switch);\n"
+                         "void f() {}");
+  ASSERT_EQ(Tokens.size(), 12u) << Tokens;
+  EXPECT_TOKEN(Tokens[9], tok::l_brace, TT_FunctionLBrace);
+}
+
 } // namespace
 } // namespace format
 } // namespace clang