ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/XRefs.cpp:389
llvm::sort(References, [](const Reference &L, const Reference &R) {
- return std::tie(L.Loc, L.CanonicalTarget, L.Role) <
- std::tie(R.Loc, R.CanonicalTarget, R.Role);
+ return L.Loc < R.Loc;
});
----------------
What are the elements `References` for the problematic case?
If we have duplicate elements, then `sort()` would now give us one of the
items. Which exact `Decl` we're gonna end up seeing is not well-defined, i.e.
it's non-deterministic.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/XRefsTests.cpp:2079
ExpectedLocations.push_back(RangeIs(R));
+ ASSERT_TRUE(!ExpectedLocations.empty()) << "Testcase must provide ranges!";
EXPECT_THAT(findReferences(AST, T.point(), 0),
----------------
NIT: use `ASSERT_THAT(ExpectedLocations, Not(IsEmpty()))` for more detailed
output in case of assertion failures.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66349/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66349
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
