Our testing didn't reflect reality: live clangd almost always uses a
preamble, and sometimes the preamble behaves differently.
This patch fixes a common test helper to be more realistic.
Preamble doesn't preserve information about which tokens come from the
command-line (this gets inlined into a source file). So remove logic
that attempts to treat symbols with such names differently.
A SymbolCollectorTest tries to verify that locals in headers are not
indexed, with preamble enabled this is only meaningful for locals of
auto-typed functions (otherwise the bodies aren't parsed).
Tests were relying on the fact that the findAnyDecl helper actually did expose
symbols from headers. Resolve by making all these functions consistently
able to find symbols in headers/preambles.
llvm-svn: 346488
Standardize on the most common namespace setup in our *.cpp files:
using namespace llvm;
namespace clang {
namespace clangd {
void foo(StringRef) { ... }
And remove redundant llvm:: qualifiers. (Except for cases like
make_unique where this causes problems with std:: and ADL).
This choice is pretty arbitrary, but some broad consistency is nice.
This is going to conflict with everything. Sorry :-/
Squash the other configurations:
A)
using namespace llvm;
using namespace clang;
using namespace clangd;
void clangd::foo(StringRef);
This is in some of the older files. (It prevents accidentally defining a
new function instead of one in the header file, for what that's worth).
B)
namespace clang {
namespace clangd {
void foo(llvm::StringRef) { ... }
This is fine, but in practice the using directive often gets added over time.
C)
namespace clang {
namespace clangd {
using namespace llvm; // inside the namespace
This was pretty common, but is a bit misleading: name lookup preferrs
clang::clangd::foo > clang::foo > llvm:: foo (no matter where the using
directive is).
llvm-svn: 344850
Summary:
These are often not expected to be used directly e.g.
```
TEST_F(Fixture, X) {
^ // "Fixture_X_Test" expanded in the macro should be down ranked.
}
```
Only doing this for sema for now, as such symbols are mostly coming from sema
e.g. gtest macros expanded in the main file. We could also add a similar field
for the index symbol.
Reviewers: sammccall
Reviewed By: sammccall
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53374
llvm-svn: 344736
Summary:
This should make all-scope completion more usable. Scope proximity for
indexes will be added in followup patch.
Reviewers: sammccall
Reviewed By: sammccall
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53131
llvm-svn: 344688
Summary:
The qualified name can be used to match a completion item to its corresponding
symbol. This can be useful for tools that measure code completion quality.
Qualified names are not precise for identifying symbols; we need to figure out a
better way to identify completion items.
Reviewers: sammccall
Reviewed By: sammccall
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D48425
llvm-svn: 335334
Summary: This also matches the range in symbol index.
Reviewers: sammccall
Subscribers: klimek, ilya-biryukov, jkorous-apple, ioeric, cfe-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44247
llvm-svn: 327129
Ilya Biryukov