sammccall added a comment. In D61588#1491728 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D61588#1491728>, @kadircet wrote:
> We already have `CodeCompletion::Origin` which is (at least should be)set to > `Identifier` in those cases. Is there a reason for not using it? I'd forgotten about that. A couple I can think of: - it's for each result, they want a result-set level flag (including when there are no results, possibly *because* we didn't parse) - identifier completion doesn't inherently mean we didn't parse, that's just the case today. I think we're going to want to offer identifiers inside comments, e.g. https://github.com/clangd/clangd/issues/44 Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D61588/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D61588 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
