kadircet added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.cpp:948
+ } else {
+ // If a tokens length is past the end of the line, it should be treated
as
+ // if the token ends at the end of the line and will not wrap onto the
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> sammccall wrote:
> > This wording is hard for me to follow. I think it's saying:
> >
> > "If the token spans a line break, truncate it to avoid this"
> It seems it would be better to split into one token per line, rather than
> simply truncating.
>
> Is truncation for simplicity or is there a reason to prefer it?
>
> FWIW I think this wouldn't be too hard to implement if you reordered the
> tokenType/tokenModifiers above so this part is the last step, and just copied
> the whole SemanticToken object from the back of the Result. But on the other
> hand it's not terribly important, either.
>
> At least I think we should have a comment for the truncate/split tradeoff.
> This wording is hard for me to follow. I think it's saying:
It is actually from LSP 😅 changed into a simpler version, I don't think we need
references to LSP in here.
> Is truncation for simplicity or is there a reason to prefer it?
Yeah I didn't want to do a loop, as in theory there can be many lines not just
two. Also we need to take care of the `Last` and delta calculations for the
following tokens.
But it isn't as bad, i suppose. Changed into splitting.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127856/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D127856
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
