sammccall marked 2 inline comments as done.
sammccall added a comment.
Tested in this file:
#include <memory>
#include <unordered_map>
#include <vector>
int main() { std::^ }
Before this change:
u -> __has_argument_type, __has_first_argument_type...
un -> __has_argument_type, __has_first_argument_type...
u_p -> __has_argument_type, __has_first_argument_type...
um -> uintmax_t, unordered_map, unordered_multimap...
After this change
u -> u16streampos, u16string, u32streampos...
un -> unary_function, unary_negate, uncaught_exception...
u_p -> unique_ptr, undeclare_no_pointers, __has_argument_type...
um -> unordered_map, unordered_multimap, __has_argument_type...
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:377
+ : Result(&Result), SymbolScore(score(Result)), FilterScore(FilterScore),
+ Score(FilterScore * SymbolScore) {}
----------------
ioeric wrote:
> It might worth mentioning how well `FilterScore * SymbolScore` performs. I
> think it could be affected by the distribution of the filtering score and
> symbol scores. We might want to do some tweaks on the numbers depending on
> the distributions...
Described this sensitivity.
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:380
CodeCompletionResult *Result;
- float Score; // 0 to 1, higher is better.
+ float SymbolScore; // higher is better
+ float FilterScore; // 0 to 1, higher is better.
----------------
ioeric wrote:
> Any reason not to use `CompletionItemScores` here? Maybe copy over some
> comments?
Done. My feeling was that CompletionItemScores was an API and we shouldn't
couple our internal layout to it. But it's convenient now and may remain so, we
can change it later.
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
https://reviews.llvm.org/D40780
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
