ioeric added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/unittests/clangd/DexIndexTests.cpp:324
+ EXPECT_THAT(generateQueryTrigrams("u_p"), trigramsAre({"up$"}));
+ EXPECT_THAT(generateQueryTrigrams("_u_p"), trigramsAre({"_u_"}));
----------------
kbobyrev wrote:
> ioeric wrote:
> > I'm not sure if this is correct. If users have explicitly typed `_`, they
> > are likely to want a `_` there. You mentioned in the patch summary that
> > users might want to match two heads with this. Could you provide an example?
> The particular example I had on my mind was `unique_ptr`. Effectively, if the
> query is `SC` then `StrCat` would be matched (because the incomplete trigram
> would be `sc$` and two heads from the symbol identifier would also yield
> `sc$`), but for `u_p`, `unique_ptr` is currently not matched.
>
> On the other hand, if there's something like `m_field` and user types `mf` or
> `m_f` it will be matched in both cases, because `m_field` yields `mf$` in the
> index build stage, so this change doesn't decrease code completion quality
> for such cases.
The problem is that `u_p` can now match `upXXX` with `up$`, which might be a
bit surprising for users.
It seems to me that another way way to handle this is to generate `u_p` trigram
for `unique_ptr`. Have we considered including separators like `_` in trigrams?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D50700
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
