kadircet added a comment. In D73780#1851920 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73780#1851920>, @hokein wrote:
> In D73780#1851654 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D73780#1851654>, @kadircet wrote: > > > LG. I might be missing some context though, what's the reasoning behind? > > Because, I think it is not necessary to treat protobufs differently. > > > > It might be sensible to have a more generic `isSymbolFromGeneratedFile` > > filter, but also for this one I don't see any developments in the near > > future. > > > the motivation of this change is that we will blacklist the proto symbols for > rename, we need a place to put protobuf-related functions (and we might > improve clangd on better supporting protobuf symbol navigation this year) , I > think it is sensible to lift them into a separate file. if that's the case, I would still go with having a more generic `isGeneratedSymbol`, that only supports filtering protobuf-related symbols for now. and would rather put it into AST.h Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D73780/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D73780 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
