kadircet added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/XRefs.cpp:1395
if (CMD->isVirtual())
- if (IdentifierAtCursor && SM.getSpellingLoc(CMD->getLocation()) ==
- IdentifierAtCursor->location()) {
----------------
it's important to note that this doesn't only suppress xrefs behaviour outside
of the declaration, but it also suppresses xrefs on parts of the declaration
apart from the function's name (like override/virtual keywords). it's
unfortunate that we don't have tests to explicitly point out that fact.
I am not sure why the decision was to exclude them in the first place, I am
definitely in favor of the new behaviour (we already provide go-to-def on
`override` keyword for example, not having xrefs on it seems surprising). I
suppose @hokein can tell if there are any other concerns I am missing.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/XRefsTests.cpp:1993
public:
void $decl[[fu^nc]]() override;
};
----------------
can we instead turn this test into a multi point check? (e.g. check that
references in `virt^ual void fu^nc() over^ride;` ... `D->fu^nc();` are all the
same?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111039/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111039
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
