kadircet added a comment.
> We can easily check the actual character at the given position in the client,
> so I could just merge the two highlighting kinds.
Thanks! Note that it might not be as easy at the face of templates, eg:
#define LESS <
template LESS typename T > class A {};
> Note that << and >> are not the only (or even the primary, in my mind) issue:
> there is an ambiguity between </> as template argument list delimiters vs.
> comparison operators.
Right, I was trying to imply all operator uses (e.g. including comparisons).
---
Currently my only high level comment is renaming the new kind to just bracket,
apart from that i think the idea LG. LMK if you're going to take a look at the
implementation @nridge, otherwise I am happy to do that as well.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.h:54
Operator,
+ AngleBracket,
----------------
actually let's name these as `Bracket` rather than `AngleBracket`, as we might
want to increase the coverage further in the future (and a use case such as
yours can still look at the textual tokens to match relevant brackets).
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:939
+
$Class[[S]]$AngleBracket[[<]]$Class[[S]]$AngleBracket[[<]]int$AngleBracket[[>]]$AngleBracket[[>]]
$LocalVariable_def[[s1]];
+ $Class[[S]]<$Class[[S]]$AngleBracket[[<]]int$AngleBracket[[>]]\
+> $LocalVariable_def[[s2]];
----------------
i don't think this is enough of a test case, we probably need a bunch other
like:
```
foo >\
>>
foo >\
>>
```
i think the firstone is going to highlight `\` for example.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139926/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139926
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
