ioeric added a comment. In D59376#1454834 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59376#1454834>, @ymandel wrote:
> In D59376#1454768 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D59376#1454768>, @ilya-biryukov > wrote: > > > Per @ioeric's suggestion: why not move the helper into > > `Tooling/Refactoring/ExtendedRange.h`? > > If it's in `ToolingRefactoring`, both stencil and transformer can access > > it. > > > > For external users, a dependency on either `ToolingCore` or > > `ToolingRefactoring` should be fine, since they're fine with a dependency > > on `Tooling` already. > > > This sounds perfect. Can I do the same for the future additions -- small, > focused libraries for each group of functions? I just want to be sure that we > don't regret the name "ExtendedRange" when I need to add the next batch. In clangd, we have a library called `SourceCode.h` that keeps source code related helpers including those that deal with ranges. I think it's reasonable to use SourceCode.h or something similar here. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59376/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59376 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
