v1nh1shungry added a comment. Oops! Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
You're right, but I currently get stuck there and need more time. And I prefer to clear the existing patches simultaneously if you don't mind. Or do you think I should merge the modification of this patch into there and give up this? ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/refactor/tweaks/RemoveUsingNamespace.cpp:212 // Produce replacements to add the qualifiers. std::string Qualifier = printUsingNamespaceName(Ctx, *TargetDirective) + "::"; for (auto Loc : IdentsToQualify) { ---------------- v1nh1shungry wrote: > tom-anders wrote: > > v1nh1shungry wrote: > > > We can replace `printUsingNamespaceName` with `printNamespaceScope` here > > > so that we can get `a::foobar()` in the test. > > > > > > However, it can sometimes cause redundancy such as in the 10th test. > > > > > > And I don't know whether it is worth it. WDYT? > > Just making sure I understood this correctly: > > > > If you replace `printUsingNamespaceName` with `printNamespaceScope`, then... > > > > - ...in the test you added it would result in `a::foobar()` instead of > > `a::b::foobar()` (which is better) > > - ... but in this test (which is the 10th test if I counted correctly): > > > > ``` > > namespace a::b { struct Foo {}; } > > using namespace a; > > using namespace a::[[b]]; > > using namespace b; > > int main() { Foo F;} > > ``` > > what would be the result..? would you get `a::Foo` instead of `a::b::Foo`? > > > Sorry, I mean the next test. I read `10` from the inlay hint but I forgot the > index starts from `0` :( > > The test I want to mention: > ``` > namespace a::b { struct Foo {}; } > using namespace a; > using namespace a::b; > using namespace [[b]]; > int main() { Foo F;} > ``` > > We will get `a::b::Foo` in both the 10th and 11th tests. So in the 10th test, > we don't get any benefits and don't sacrifice anything. In the 11th test, we > get more redundancy than the existing version. > > Apologize again for my mistake. FYI, we have a discussion left here. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D138028/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D138028 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits