Reflow paragraphs in comments.

This is intended as a clean up after the big clang-format commit
(r280751), which unfortunately resulted in many of the comment
paragraphs in LLDB being very hard to read.

FYI, the script I used was:

import textwrap
import commands
import os
import sys
import re
tmp = "%s.tmp"%sys.argv[1]
out = open(tmp, "w+")
with open(sys.argv[1], "r") as f:
  header = ""
  text = ""
  comment = re.compile(r'^( *//) ([^ ].*)$')
  special = re.compile(r'^((([A-Z]+[: ])|([0-9]+ )).*)|(.*;)$')
  for line in f:
      match = comment.match(line)
      if match and not special.match(match.group(2)):
          # skip intentionally short comments.
          if not text and len(match.group(2)) < 40:
              out.write(line)
              continue

          if text:
              text += " " + match.group(2)
          else:
              header = match.group(1)
              text = match.group(2)

          continue

      if text:
          filled = textwrap.wrap(text, width=(78-len(header)),
                                 break_long_words=False)
          for l in filled:
              out.write(header+" "+l+'\n')
              text = ""

      out.write(line)

os.rename(tmp, sys.argv[1])

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46144

llvm-svn: 331197

1 files changed, 14 insertions, 15 deletions

diff --git a/lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectBreakpointCommand.cpp b/lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectBreakpointCommand.cpp
index 95a17db8081..f2546cbed84 100644
--- a/lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectBreakpointCommand.cpp
+++ b/lldb/source/Commands/CommandObjectBreakpointCommand.cpp
@@ -412,8 +412,8 @@ protected:
           } else {
             BreakpointLocationSP bp_loc_sp(
                 bp->FindLocationByID(cur_bp_id.GetLocationID()));
-            // This breakpoint does have an associated location.
-            // Get its breakpoint options.
+            // This breakpoint does have an associated location. Get its
+            // breakpoint options.
             if (bp_loc_sp)
               bp_options = bp_loc_sp->GetLocationOptions();
           }
@@ -422,9 +422,9 @@ protected:
         }
       }
 
-      // If we are using script language, get the script interpreter
-      // in order to set or collect command callback.  Otherwise, call
-      // the methods associated with this object.
+      // If we are using script language, get the script interpreter in order
+      // to set or collect command callback.  Otherwise, call the methods
+      // associated with this object.
       if (m_options.m_use_script_language) {
         ScriptInterpreter *script_interp = m_interpreter.GetScriptInterpreter();
         // Special handling for one-liner specified inline.
@@ -456,16 +456,15 @@ private:
   std::vector<BreakpointOptions *> m_bp_options_vec; // This stores the
                                                      // breakpoint options that
                                                      // we are currently
-  // collecting commands for.  In the CollectData... calls we need
-  // to hand this off to the IOHandler, which may run asynchronously.
-  // So we have to have some way to keep it alive, and not leak it.
-  // Making it an ivar of the command object, which never goes away
-  // achieves this.  Note that if we were able to run
-  // the same command concurrently in one interpreter we'd have to
-  // make this "per invocation".  But there are many more reasons
-  // why it is not in general safe to do that in lldb at present,
-  // so it isn't worthwhile to come up with a more complex mechanism
-  // to address this particular weakness right now.
+  // collecting commands for.  In the CollectData... calls we need to hand this
+  // off to the IOHandler, which may run asynchronously. So we have to have
+  // some way to keep it alive, and not leak it. Making it an ivar of the
+  // command object, which never goes away achieves this.  Note that if we were
+  // able to run the same command concurrently in one interpreter we'd have to
+  // make this "per invocation".  But there are many more reasons why it is not
+  // in general safe to do that in lldb at present, so it isn't worthwhile to
+  // come up with a more complex mechanism to address this particular weakness
+  // right now.
   static const char *g_reader_instructions;
 };