Did you need any other change ? Didn't realise the revision was not "accepted".

added comment.

Addressed comments.

Clangd was seen to be crashing on Objective C/C++ files.
It could not be reproduced but inspection of coredump showed that the expandedTokens returned arrayref with begin > end (negative length).

Addressed comments.

Remove unintended changes.

Made the optimization an 'opt-in'.
Created TokenBuffer::indexExpandedToken() for creating the index.

LG. Thanks.
Sorry. This completely missed my inbox.

LGTM. Thanks.

LG. Thanks for noticing and fixing it!

Addressed comments.

Thanks. LG.
Couple of comments about adding tests to clangd as well.

Addressed comments.

Addressed comments.

Remove unintended changes.

Print value of new OverriddenBy flag.

In D95812#2535077, @sammccall wrote:

This looks about right to me...
Unfortunately I landed ff4832dbff0ccf1fd29f726efe72fd1220cd645a and 1eb7fd089e2fcf3fe211f865b28e2fed12128c3f meanwhile so this will need a rebase :-(

The first of those patches introduces flags on returned refs to indicate which are decls/defs. I'd suggest adding an "override" flag and populating it for these results.

Rebase + Add OverriddenBy flag for such references.

Move Index query to more logical place.

Added a comment about the calculation.

In D94785#2506685, @hokein wrote:

if you don't mind, could you rerun the benchmark (we have a behavior changes from original version, I guess it won't not change significantly)? and update the data in the description before landing.

Updated index tests's input files.

Index all member functions instead of only polymorphic functions.

In D94785#2506186, @hokein wrote:

I think we'd better bump the index version, even though this is not a breaking change, but we will collect more data. Not bumping the index version may lead to a half-completed state of the index (e.g. only newly-changed files will get completed index data in background index).

Addressed comments. Left a todo to fix the bug in RefContainers later.

Addressed comments.

In D94785#2501312, @njames93 wrote:

My only question is does this try and index lambdas, under the hood they are declared as a CXXRecordDecl, defined in function scope?

Added tests for not indexing lambdas.

Addressed comments.

Rebase.