[clang-format] Fix a bug that misformats Access Specifier after *[]

Fixes llvm#55132.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D124589

Author: owenca

clang/lib/Format/UnwrappedLineParser.cpp

@@ -2048,6 +2048,11 @@ bool UnwrappedLineParser::tryToParseLambdaIntroducer() {
   nextToken();
   if (FormatTok->is(tok::l_square))
     return false;
+  if (FormatTok->is(tok::r_square)) {
+    const FormatToken *Next = Tokens->peekNextToken();
+    if (Next && Next->is(tok::greater))
+      return false;
+  }
   parseSquare(/*LambdaIntroducer=*/true);
   return true;
 }

clang/unittests/Format/FormatTest.cpp

@@ -3336,6 +3336,14 @@ TEST_F(FormatTest, UnderstandsAccessSpecifiers) {
   verifyFormat("if (public == private)\n");
   verifyFormat("void foo(public, private)");
   verifyFormat("public::foo();");
+
+  verifyFormat("class A {\n"
+               "public:\n"
+               "  std::unique_ptr<int *[]> b() { return nullptr; }\n"
+               "\n"
+               "private:\n"
+               "  int c;\n"
+               "};");
 }
 
 TEST_F(FormatTest, SeparatesLogicalBlocks) {
@@ -21487,6 +21495,7 @@ TEST_F(FormatTest, FormatsLambdas) {
                "  bar([]() {} // Did not respect SpacesBeforeTrailingComments\n"
                "  );\n"
                "}");
+  verifyFormat("auto k = *[](int *j) { return j; }(&i);");
 
   // Lambdas created through weird macros.
   verifyFormat("void f() {\n"