ilya-biryukov added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39430#943387, @malaperle wrote:
> I'd rather keep one commit per fix or feature. I would think the clang-format > part should be one commit/review on its own. But I'm not very familiar with > the practices here so I'll let others comment. +1, please create a separate review per fix or feature. ================ Comment at: clangd/ClangdServer.h:288 + /// Get "FixIt" replacements for the given diagnostic. + llvm::SmallVector<TextEdit, 1> getFixIts(StringRef File, + const clangd::Diagnostic &D); ---------------- There are two ways to return fixits from `ClangdServer` now, one is `DiagnosticsConsumer`, the other is the new `getFixIts` method. I'd also argue the fact that we can't attach fixits to diagnostics is LSP-specific and therefore it should be handled by `ClangdLSPServer`. If the problem is that the cache is never cleaned up, we could simply remove the fixits when handling `textDocument/didClose`. I think we should not put this method into `ClangdServer`. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D39430 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
