sammccall added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/CodeComplete.cpp:193
+ } else {
+ elog("Code completion header path manipulation failed {0}",
+ HeaderFile.takeError());
----------------
I think this is too noisy.
We can hit this in "normal" cases of certain projects.
For better or worse, we don't currently filter out index results where we know
the responsible header and can't include it (because it's not under any include
path entry). In these cases toHeaderFile() returns an error.
Since this can happen in the normal case for *each* completion candidate
(default 100), and completion requests are very frequent, this could dominate
log output in affected projects.
It *might* be OK at vlog? I get the desire to not silence errors here. I think
the question is what are the error cases we're *trying* to call out loudly.
Maybe we can separate out the "shouldn't happen" vs the "fairly expected" cases.
(Even then there's the prospect that this is either going to not fire or fire
dozens of times, which is a little sad)
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93220/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D93220
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
