kadircet added a comment.
as discussed offline, i am hesitant about `validateEdits` layering at the
moment. but i suppose the best thing to do is move it into clangdserver and
expose a structrual api, as you proposed, which can be done independently.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/ClangdServer.h:266
+ /// If \p Rng is non-null, formats only that region.
+ void formatFile(PathRef File, const Range *Rng,
Callback<tooling::Replacements> CB);
----------------
nit: Optional<Range> instead of a pointer?
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/DraftStore.cpp:50
+ S.insert(I.base(), '1');
+ return;
+ }
----------------
nit: s/return/break/ same below
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/DraftStore.cpp:57
+ }
+ assert(*I == '9');
+ *I = '0'; // and keep incrementing to the left.
----------------
nit: i'd drop the assert
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/DraftStore.cpp:66
// We treat versions as opaque, but the protocol says they increase.
- if (*Version <= D.Version)
- log("File version went from {0} to {1}", D.Version, Version);
- D.Version = *Version;
+ if (SpecifiedVersion.compare_numeric(D.Version) <= 0)
+ log("File version went from {0} to {1}", D.Version, SpecifiedVersion);
----------------
why not a not_equals instead? we are going to override the version anyway
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SourceCode.h:208
+llvm::Error applyChange(std::string &Contents,
+ const TextDocumentContentChangeEvent &Change);
+
----------------
i was going to complain about sourcecode depending on protocol, but apparently
it already does...
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97738/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D97738
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
