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

Fixes llvm#114408.

(cherry picked from commit 6ca816f)

Author: owenca

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;

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