sammccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/StdSymbolMap.inc:958
SYMBOL(remainder, std::, <cmath>)
-SYMBOL(remove, std::, <cstdio>)
SYMBOL(remove_all_extents, std::, <type_traits>)
----------------
Is the stdio version so uncommon we are willing to be wrong about it? For
`move` we omit it from here and consider it case-by-case, I'd have imagined
doing the same here
(BTW at some point we may want to extend this to list alternative headers for
ambiguous symbols)
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/include-mapping/cppreference_parser.py:138
# FIXME: use these as a fallback rather than ignoring entirely.
- if variant:
+ if variant != (namespace+symbol_name in variants_to_accept):
continue
----------------
This logic seems a bit weird and non-general: it allows us to accept any
variant and reject any non-variant, but it doesn't allow us to accept
a*specific* variant (they are named) and doesn't allow us to accept both (which
currently would lead to the symbol being dropped as ambiguous).
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D114724/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D114724
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
