sammccall added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D40486#945193, @ilya-biryukov wrote:
> I'll update the implementation and place the `Context` as the first parameter
> everywhere instead.
> Could you take a look at other changes in the patch while I'm at it?
Just pinging this - there's still places where Context is in a different
position (at least in ClangdServer)
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdServer.cpp:36
- ~FulfillPromiseGuard() { Promise.set_value(); }
+ ~FulfillContextPromiseGuard() { Promise.set_value(std::move(Ctx)); }
----------------
ilya-biryukov wrote:
> sammccall wrote:
> > Yikes, I can see how we got here, but we really don't get to move out of
> > something we received an lvalue-reference to...
> >
> > I think a safer idiom here is turning a whole lambda into a destructor:
> >
> > auto Fulfil = MakeDestructor([&]{
> > DonePromise.set_value(std::move(Ctx));
> > });
> >
> > I'm not sure if LLVM has a shared utility for this, I've seen it in other
> > codebases. Either way we could just define it here.
> >
> > (Or we could copy the context to avoid the awkwardness)
> Thanks for suggestion. I totally agree, callbacks on scope exit are better.
>
> I couldn't find an utility like that in LLVM, but I think it's a useful one.
> I'll add this locally to this file, but maybe we should make this helper
> public and put it into clangd?
> What are you thoughts on that?
Sounds good. I'm wary of adding lots of tiny utility headers - maybe if we
squint it could go in Function.h?
================
Comment at: clangd/ProtocolHandlers.h:32
public:
- using Ctx = RequestContext;
+ using Ctx = Context;
virtual ~ProtocolCallbacks() = default;
----------------
We should use one name or the other. Fine to do this to keep the patch small,
but leave a FIXME?
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D40486
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
