nridge marked an inline comment as done. nridge added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/clangd/Features.rst:264 +-------------------------------------+------------+----------+ -| Type hierarchy | No | No | +| Type hierarchy | No | Yes | +-------------------------------------+------------+----------+ ---------------- malaperle wrote: > nridge wrote: > > sammccall wrote: > > > nridge wrote: > > > > Should I perhaps change type hierarchy's entry in the LSP column from > > > > "No" to "Proposed"? > > > I'm not sure what "no" means, if it doesn't mean "proposed". > > > > > > Changing the "no" links to say "proposal" and link to it would be useful, > > > I think. > > > (And we could delete any rows that don't have a proposal) > > Good idea -- I'll look at that in a separate commit. > The rows that have "no" and don't have proposals meant that we wanted to make > proposals for the LSP eventually in order to match other IDEs feature. Many > didn't have proposals at the time. Right! I wouldn't delete any rows -- just maybe file (and link to) an LSP issue for any rows that don't already have proposals. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64614/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64614 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
