ilya-biryukov accepted this revision.
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LGTM. Do you need my help in landing this?
> 1. If it finds a callable, provide the name of the callable, followed by an
> opening parenthesis, followed by `$0`, followed by a closing parenthesis.
So that we don't clutter the source code with function parameters? This makes
sense.
But I think some clients we might want to support don't have `signatureHelp`,
so we may want to have a flag to switch between these two behaviors.
Another case where this might be bad is overloaded functions. I may choose one
overload in completion, but `signatureHelp` will initially point into a
different one.
================
Comment at: clangd/Protocol.h:458
+///
+/// A parameter can have a label and a doc-comment.
+struct ParameterInformation {
----------------
malaperle wrote:
> rwols wrote:
> > @malaperle I copied the sentences from the protocol markdown file over
> > [here](https://github.com/Microsoft/language-server-protocol/blob/master/protocol.md),
> > but judging from your comment
> > [here](https://reviews.llvm.org/D35894#inline-314196) that might a problem.
> > Do you suggest to change this or is this okay as-is?
> I'm not a lawyer and I have very limited understanding of how these things
> work but I would maybe reword the longer ones and keep it a short summary of
> a few words. I'll ask around what my other open source colleagues think
> though.
I'm not a lawyer either, but I believe it does not matter whether you reword
things or not, you're still bound to comply with the license when doing any
derived work.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38048
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
