sammccall added a comment. In D71345#1780632 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D71345#1780632>, @nridge wrote:
> I tried to do a less general version of this (for go-to-definition only) in > D70727 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D70727> :) Ah, I hadn't seen that. After thinking about this a bit, I think the behavior in that patch is OK, and it's complexity that will do us in. More cases keep coming up - internally people complained about this in code actions which is the hardest case to fix and needs most of this complexity. How do you feel about the approach here? I like having the description of the problem centralized and directing callsites toward a solution. At the same time, it does make me sad that a fairly nice abstraction becomes so much harder to pick up and use, the API is pretty horrendous. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D71345/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D71345 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
