Details
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rG LLVM Github Monorepo
Event Timeline
thanks.
clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/HoverTests.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
3727 | I believe this case should trigger a crash, but I don't see the crash with a trunk-built clangd, do we miss something here? |
thanks!
clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/HoverTests.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
3727 | It crashes on invalid code. I've inspected two user workspaces: class Foo{}; void foo(Foo param = nullptr); void foo(ClassName param = functionReturningObjectOfSimilarSoundingButUnrelatedClass()); I guess clangd is not even expected to act soundly in the face of non-compiling code. |
clang-tools-extra/clangd/Hover.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
663 | We're ignoring all ParmVarDecl cases, The crash here is for broken code. For the crash case, the AST node looks like `-ParmVarDecl 0x563b7cc853c0 <col:10, col:20> col:14 invalid param 'Foo':'Foo' cinit `-OpaqueValueExpr 0x563b7cc854a0 <col:20> 'Foo':'Foo' One alternative is to exclude invalid VarDecl, then the Hover feature still keep working on valid ParmVarDecl. if (const auto* Var = dyn_cast<VarDecl>(D); Var && !Var->isInvalidDecl()) { ... } | |
clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/HoverTests.cpp | ||
3727 | thanks for the clarification. That makes sense. We can still use these broken code (the first one should be good enough) in the HoverTest, we need to add a magic comment /* error-ok */. |
Thanks, looks good, just one nit to simplify the unittest.
clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/HoverTests.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
3726 | nit: instead of creating a completely-new TEST, it seems simpler to just add a testcase in the existing TEST(Hover, All). {R"cpp(// Should not crash on an invalid param decl. class Foo {}; // error-ok void foo(Foo [[fo^o]] = nullptr); )cpp", [](HoverInfo &HI) { HI.Name = "foo"; HI.Type = "Foo"; HI.Kind = index::SymbolKind::Parameter; HI.NamespaceScope = ""; HI.LocalScope = "foo::"; HI.Definition = "Foo foo = <null expr>"; }}, |
Thanks!
clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/HoverTests.cpp | ||
---|---|---|
3726 | I'm not sure I agree. The Hover, All test takes already about 5 seconds to scroll through on the screen :) On top of that, other test cases that are a result of crash fixes seem to be separate too. |
We're ignoring all ParmVarDecl cases,
The crash here is for broken code. For the crash case, the AST node looks like
One alternative is to exclude invalid VarDecl, then the Hover feature still keep working on valid ParmVarDecl.