- User Since
- Aug 19 2015, 3:38 AM (231 w, 2 d)
Do you mean naming the scope something like clangd.meta.disable to make it clear it's a clangd extension?
(In that case, we might as well make it something more descriptive, like clangd.preprocessor.inactive. meta doesn't convey much information.)
Wed, Jan 22
sorry for the looong delay, I was OOO for a few weeks before.
the scope of this patch is not very clear, the changes touch two different code parts SymbolCollector, and Rename, and we are lacking tests for SymbolCollector. I'd suggest spliting this patch into smaller patches:
clang-format the code.
Tue, Jan 21
- add fixme
- add rename test
Mon, Jan 20
looks good, thanks.
@kuhnel, I think we should exclude from running clang-format on lint test files.
Fri, Jan 17
Dec 17 2019
(apologies, the FIXME may imply this approach...)
@ilya-biryukov thanks for taking it during my OOO, just a drive-by comment :)
Dec 11 2019
address review comment -- simplify the unittest code.
thanks for the fast review.
Dec 10 2019
I think we probably want to do the vice-versa thing (remove the inline keyword) in define-outline.
Dec 9 2019
add a fixme.
- don't emit the internal messages to users, llvm::Expected => llvm::Optional
- use the index of lexed array to calculate the adjustment cost.
address the review comment.
Dec 8 2019
some minor fixes.
address reveiw comments.
Dec 6 2019
Fix empty lines.
add more symbols.
Dec 5 2019
use the assertion.
Dec 4 2019
thanks, looks good with a few nits. I think the benchmark data doesn't correct any more with the latest patch, we don't increase number of symbols.
- re-define the concept of a near miss
- add metric for evaluate how good a near miss is
Dec 3 2019
thanks, mostly good, my main concern is that the patch still relies on the CollectMacro and CollectMainFileSymbols option, see my comments below.
Dec 2 2019
btw, could you measure the increasing size of the index with this patch?
address review comments.
Nov 29 2019