jvikstrom added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.cpp:87
+ bool TraverseNestedNameSpecifierLoc(NestedNameSpecifierLoc NNSLoc) {
+ if (NestedNameSpecifier *NNS = NNSLoc.getNestedNameSpecifier())
+ if (NNS->getKind() == NestedNameSpecifier::Namespace ||
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> if you're just doing something and then calling base, can you make this Visit
> instead of Traverse?
NestedNameSpecifierLoc does not have a visit method for some reason. It only
has a traverse method and this seems to be the way people get nested namespaces
from what I can tell. (Maybe a Visit method is something that should be added
to the RecursiveASTVisitor, but I wouldn't do that in this patch).
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:86
template<typename T>
- struct $Class[[C]] : abc::A<T> {
+ struct $Class[[C]] : $Namespace[[abc]]::A<T> {
typename T::A* D;
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> can you add a case where we spell with leading colons e.g. `::abc::A`
Added it in the case that focuses on namespaces further down.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D64492/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D64492
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
