ioeric added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D40562#942521, @arphaman wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D40562#941753, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D40562#941570, @arphaman wrote: > > > > > I'm not actually 100% sure, but I would imagine that this one of the > > > reasons, yes. It would be nice to improve the cache to have things like > > > namespace-level `Decl`, although how will lookup work in that case? Btw, > > > do you think the cache can be reused in clangd as well? > > > > > > As Eric mentioned, we are planning to have project-global completion for > > namespace-level Decls (to have completion items not #included in the > > current file and add the #include directive properly). So the cache is > > probably not that useful to clangd long-term. > > > Interesting, thanks! Will this be something that clients of clangd can > opt-out from? Or at least configure certain aspects of the behaviour? Absolutely! Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D40562 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
