ioeric added inline comments.

================
Comment at: clangd/index/Index.h:122
+
+  llvm::Optional<Details> Detail;
+
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> ioeric wrote:
> > sammccall wrote:
> > > ioeric wrote:
> > > > sammccall wrote:
> > > > > I think you probably want a raw pointer rather than optional:
> > > > >  - reduce the size of the struct when it's absent
> > > > >  - make it inheritance-friendly so we can hang index-specific info 
> > > > > off it
> > > > > (raw pointer rather than unique_ptr because it's owned by a slab not 
> > > > > by malloc, but unique_ptr is ok for now)
> > > > > 
> > > > This is not easy for now with `unique_ptr` because of this line :( 
> > > > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang-tools-extra/blob/3565d1a1a692fc9f5c21e634b470535da2bb4d25/clangd/index/SymbolYAML.cpp#L141).
> > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > This shouldn't be an issue when we have the optimized symbol slab, 
> > > > where we store raw pointers. And we would probably want to serialize 
> > > > the whole slab instead of the individual symbols anyway.
> > > > 
> > > > > reduce the size of the struct when it's absent
> > > > `llvm::Optional` doesn't take much more space, so the size should be 
> > > > fine.
> > > > 
> > > > > make it inheritance-friendly so we can hang index-specific info off it
> > > > Could you elaborate on `index-specific info`? It's unclear to me how 
> > > > this would be used.
> > > > This is not easy for now with unique_ptr because of this line
> > > Oh no, somehow i missed this during review.
> > > We shouldn't be relying on symbols being copyable. I'll try to work out 
> > > how to fix this and delete the copy constructor.
> > > 
> > > > This shouldn't be an issue when we have the optimized symbol slab, 
> > > > where we store raw pointers.
> > > Sure. That's not a big monolithic/mysterous thing though, storing the 
> > > details in the slab can be done in this patch... If you think it'll be 
> > > easier once strings are arena-based, then maybe we should delay this 
> > > patch until that's done, rather than make that work bigger.
> > > 
> > > > And we would probably want to serialize the whole slab instead of the 
> > > > individual symbols anyway.
> > > This i'm less sure about, but I don't think it matters.
> > > 
> > > > llvm::Optional doesn't take much more space, so the size should be fine.
> > > Optional takes the same size as the details itself (plus one bool). This 
> > > is fairly small for now, but I think a major point of Details is to 
> > > expand it in the future?
> > > 
> > > > Could you elaborate on index-specific info? It's unclear to me how this 
> > > > would be used.
> > > Yeah, this is something we talked about in the meeting with Marc-Andre 
> > > but it's not really obvious - what's the point of allowing Details to be 
> > > extended if clangd has to consume it?
> > > 
> > > It sounded like he might have use cases for using index infrastructure 
> > > outside clangd. We might also have google-internal index features we want 
> > > (matching generated code to proto fields?). I'm not really sure how 
> > > compelling this argument is.
> > Thanks for the allocator change!
> > 
> > `Details` now contains just stringrefs. I wonder how much we want it to be 
> > inherit-friendly at this point, as the size is relatively small now. If you 
> > think this is a better way to go, I'll make the structure contain strings 
> > and store the whole structure in arena. This would require some tweaks for 
> > yamls tho but shouldn't be hard. 
> So this needs to be at least optional I think - at the moment, how does an 
> API user know whether to fetch the rest of the details?
> 
> FWIW, the size difference is already significant: symbol is 136 bytes if this 
> is a unique_ptr, and 164 bytes if it's optional (+20%) - StringRefs are still 
> pretty big.
> But I don't feel really strongly about this.
Done. Made it a raw pointer. PTAL


Repository:
  rCTE Clang Tools Extra

https://reviews.llvm.org/D41345



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to