[java] not enough indentation when using builder pattern

[mtaran-google]

class Clazz {
  void foo() {
    return new Foo.newBlah(
        new Bar().)
  }
}

if you have the cursor after the last . and press enter, the cursor goes underneath the start of new, whereas it should have a +4 indent

[marijnh]

The builder pattern doesn't seem to a relevant factor here, this is how it indents any argument list. Do you want any continued expression to be indented extra? Or only specific types like .-access? I.e. should the third line be aligned with the start of the expression, or indented extra?

foo(
    1 + 3 +
    3 + 4)

[mtaran-google]

I misspoke in my original example. The better example case is when you have the cursor before the last . and press enter. That's where the style guide permits a newline, not after the ..

https://google.github.io/styleguide/javaguide.html#s4.5.2-line-wrapping-indent says

two continuation lines use the same indentation level if and only if they begin with syntactically parallel elements.

I realize this is written a bit vaguely, but based on it I would say that things like (bracket-less) arithmetic, boolean, etc. expressions should be written with the same continuation level, but also sequential dot-accesses should too, e.g.:

T out = foo
    .bar()
    .baz()
    .quux();

is valid.

In my example (with the corrected position of the newline), there's a +4 indent after the newBlah(, because then you're in the context of the parameter list, and it's the first line break (wrap) there. Afterwards, after the new Bar(), you're in the context of a single element of the argument list, which has not yet had a line break (wrap) in it, so when you press enter you should get an additional +4 indent. If you continue typing .baz()\n.quux(), you'll continue to be in the context of the single element of the argument list, and since that element has already wrapped once, wrapping it more will not add additional indentation.

I hope that helps!

[marijnh]

So a continued argument should always be intented more than the start of the argument? I.e. even in my example, you want the indentation shown below?

foo(
    1 + 3 +
        3 + 4)

[mtaran-google]

I checked with our formatter, and yes, that is correct.