nridge added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.h:82 + FileScope, + GlobalScope, + ---------------- sammccall wrote: > nridge wrote: > > Would it make sense to call this `NamespaceScope` instead? > > > > I understand it's "global" in the sense that it's visible to other > > translation units, but it's not "global" in the sense that it's not > > necessarily in the global namespace. > > > > (On the other hand, I can see how `FileScope` symbols are also "namespace > > scope", so... could go either way.) > Yeah, the file-scope thing. (Maybe it's not an important distinction, but it > seems pretty interesting for functions at least) > > The other consideration is that I harbor a little bit of hope we could get > some convergence across implementations, so avoiding lang-specific terms is > nice. In any case, client implementers are probably not C++ people! > (of course we can use different names internally than we use in the protocol, > but it seems less confusing to align them) +1 for a distinct `FileScope` being useful Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D95701/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D95701 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
