ioeric added a comment. Agreed with Ilya. I'd probably also make this depend on the ongoing implementation, as exposing LSP endpoints without proper implementation might be confusing to clangd users who only look at the the LSP endpoints. Users need to dig two levels of abstraction to find out that it's not implemented.
================ Comment at: clangd/ClangdServer.h:158 + /// Retrieve locations for symbol references. + void references(PathRef File, Position Pos, bool includeDeclaration, + Callback<std::vector<Location>> CB); ---------------- I think the C++ API can return `SymbolOccurrence` in the callback, which would allow C++ API users to get richer information about the occurrences e.g. kind, relationship, code snippet. ================ Comment at: clangd/ClangdServer.h:158 + /// Retrieve locations for symbol references. + void references(PathRef File, Position Pos, bool includeDeclaration, + Callback<std::vector<Location>> CB); ---------------- ioeric wrote: > I think the C++ API can return `SymbolOccurrence` in the callback, which > would allow C++ API users to get richer information about the occurrences > e.g. kind, relationship, code snippet. nit: s/includeDeclaration/IncludeDeclaration/ Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D50896 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
