lh123 marked an inline comment as done.
lh123 added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/Hover.cpp:1065
+ if (Parameters && !Parameters->empty()) {
+ Output.addParagraph().appendText("Parameters: ");
----------------
kadircet wrote:
> it's a subtle invariant that we only have parameters for functions (which has
> a return type) or constructor/destructor/conversion-operators (which doesn't
> have either a type or a return type).
>
> I think we should assert on `Type` not being present here, as otherwise we
> would probably duplicate parameters in both places. can you also add a
> condition around `!Type` and have a comment saying ` // Don't print
> parameters after Type, as they're likely to be mentioned there.`
We cannot assert here because the `function type` has both `ReturnType`,
`Type`, and `Parameters`. I think we only need to not print `Type` when
`ReturnType` or `Parameters` are present.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D114621/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D114621
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
