arphaman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/CodeCompletion/call.cpp:22
// CHECK-CC1: COMPLETION: Pattern : dynamic_cast<<#type#>>(<#expression#>)
- // CHECK-CC1: f(N::Y y, <#int ZZ#>)
+ // CHECK-CC1: f(Y y, <#int ZZ#>)
// CHECK-CC1-NEXT: f(int i, <#int j#>, int k)
----------------
Could we also test a similar class to `Y` that's not typedefed, so you'd see
`f(N::Y)`?
================
Comment at: test/CodeCompletion/enum-switch-case-qualified.cpp:25
// RUN: %clang_cc1 -fsyntax-only -code-completion-at=%s:23:8 %s -o - |
FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-CC1 %s
- // CHECK-CC1: Blue : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Blue
- // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Green : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Green
- // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Indigo : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Indigo
- // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Orange : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Orange
- // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Red : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Red
- // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Violet : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Violet
- // CHECK-CC1: Yellow : [#M::N::C::Color#]N::C::Yellow
+ // CHECK-CC1: Blue : [#Color#]N::C::Blue
+ // CHECK-CC1-NEXT: Green : [#Color#]N::C::Green
----------------
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> This may be a somewhat unwanted part of this change.
> Enum type is now written without qualifier here. I would argue that's ok,
> since the actual enum values are always properly qualified (they have to be,
> as they are actually inserted by completion) and those qualifiers provide all
> the necessary context for the user.
I'm not 100% comfortable with making this kind of change right now. I'll try to
investigate what's best for our users.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D38538
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
