BenBlumer wrote: I'm a bit of a outsider to the LLVM project, but I'd say a fix to a broken, already shipped, feature now is better than a general fix down the line.
On Sat, Oct 26, 2024, 3:23 AM Julian Schmidt ***@***.***> wrote: > ***@***.**** commented on this pull request. > > CC @HighCommander4 <https://github.com/HighCommander4> @kadircet > <https://github.com/kadircet> > > Technically, Sam told me last EuroLLVM that he had some refactor of the > SelectionTree that would resolve issues like this in the general case, > but as it is unclear that those changes will get in someday/in the 'near' > future, I think that this PR makes sense to merge. Even though this is kind > of a band-aid fix. Thoughts? > ------------------------------ > > In clang-tools-extra/clangd/refactor/tweaks/ExtractFunction.cpp > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81640#discussion_r1817768904>: > > > + // selection range in selectionTree. Additionally, a CXXOperatorCallExpr > > of a > + // binary operation can be unselected because it's children claim the > entire > > ⬇️ Suggested change > > - // selection range in selectionTree. Additionally, a CXXOperatorCallExpr > of a > - // binary operation can be unselected because it's children claim the > entire > + // selection range in selectionTree. Additionally, a CXXOperatorCallExpr > of a > + // binary operation can be unselected because its children claim the entire > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81640#pullrequestreview-2397141474>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA3J4MJEX4VEB24H7HVXXWTZ5NURZAVCNFSM6AAAAABDG6LIWCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDGOJXGE2DCNBXGQ> > . > You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: > ***@***.***> > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/81640 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
