rwols added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clangd/ClangdLSPServer.cpp:93 +void ClangdLSPServer::replyWithTextEditsOrError( + Ctx C, std::string Code, ---------------- sammccall wrote: > This function is pretty hard to understand from a high level - it's a bit of > an odd split. > > Is the duplication really so bad? The straight-line code could be easy to > read: > > auto File = Params.textDocument.uri.file; > auto Edits = Server.formatRange(File, Params.range); > if (Edits) > C.reply(replacementsToEdits(Server.getDocument(File), Edits.get())); > else > C.replyError(Edits.takeError()); > > (The "[" won't be needed after D39435, and we should add a replyError() > overload that takes an Error) This is a very nice idea! I'll probably update the diff tomorrow. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39430 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
