ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clangd/Quality.cpp:373 + if (TypeMatchesPreferred) + Score *= 2.0; + ---------------- sammccall wrote: > is 2 really enough? Changed to 5. We can tweak it later if that turns out to be too big. ================ Comment at: clangd/Quality.h:98 + /// Whether the item matches the type expected in the completion context. + bool TypeMatchesPreferred = false; /// FIXME: unify with index proximity score - signals should be ---------------- sammccall wrote: > sammccall wrote: > > you've inserted in the middle of the file proximity stuff :-) > Generally we'd put both context/symbol types as the signal here, rather than > just whether they match, unless it's prohibitive. They'd get populated > manually, and by merge() overloads, respectively. I did it to avoid inefficiencies of: 1. copying the context type for each completion item, 2. copying the symbol type for each of the indexed items. My understanding is that (1) can be avoided by storing a reference to a type, since it outlives the signals. But we'll still have to do a copy for (2), right? That's probably not a bottleneck anyway, but keeping it a bool flag for now and happy to change it to your liking. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D52276 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
