ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clangd/Protocol.h:295 + +struct ClangdConfigurationParams { + ---------------- malaperle wrote: > ilya-biryukov wrote: > > Maybe call it `ClangdConfigurationParamsChange` to make it clear those are > > diffs, not the actual params? > The idea was that we can reuse the same struct for > InitializeParams.initializationOptions Since `InitializeParams.initializationOptions` may also have unset values (`llvm::None`), it also seems fine to treat those as a "diff" between the default parameters and the new ones. The reasoning behind naming for me is that if we allow only a subset of fields to be set and use the ones that were set override the corresponding values, it really feels like an entity describing a **change** to the configuration parameters, not the parameters themselves. I don't have a strong opinion on this one, though. If you'd prefer to keep the current name, it's totally fine with me. https://reviews.llvm.org/D39571 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits