Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Accessibility modifier on record causes unindentation of following type #1404

Closed
1 of 3 tasks
Smaug123 opened this issue Jan 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1429
Closed
1 of 3 tasks

Accessibility modifier on record causes unindentation of following type #1404

Smaug123 opened this issue Jan 27, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #1429

Comments

@Smaug123
Copy link
Contributor

Smaug123 commented Jan 27, 2021

Issue created from fantomas-online

Code

module Foo =
    type Stores =
        private {
            ModeratelyLongName : int
        }
    
    type private Bang = abstract Baz : int

Result

module Foo =
    type Stores =
        private
            { ModeratelyLongName: int }

type private Bang =
    abstract Baz: int

Problem description

This only happens when the accessibility modifier is there. It also happens when the last element is a let rather than a type.

Extra information

  • The formatted result breaks by code.
  • The formatted result gives compiler warnings.
  • I or my company would be willing to help fix this.

Options

Fantomas Master at 01/27/2021 07:36:19 - 138146e

    { config with
                MaxLineLength = 40
                SpaceBeforeUppercaseInvocation = true }

Did you know that you can ignore files when formatting from fantomas-tool or the FAKE targets by using a .fantomasignore file?

nojaf added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 5, 2021
* Don't double unindent when record has access modifier. Fixes #1404

* access modifier on MultilineBlockBracketsOnSameColumn record type.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant