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
