malaperle added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D39050#1040501, @akyrtzi wrote:
> > That would be good. How would one go about asking Clang to generate this > > extra information? Would a Clang Plugin be suitable for this? > > That's an interesting idea that we could explore, but I don't have much > experience with that mechanism to comment on. > > > Only the lexer was needed to get the end of the token > > Ok, that's interesting, not sure why Xcode is so fast to highlight, did you > reuse same SourceManager/Lexer/buffers for occurrences from same file ? We'd > definitely add the end-loc if we cannot come up with a mechanism to highlight > fast enough without it. I don't think Xcode is quite fast, it's about 10 times slower (although I'm not sure it really finished) than when I use my branch that has the end-loc. I would try end-locs in Xcode if I could, to compare :) So I don't really know where the bottleneck is in Xcode. Comparing oranges to oranges, it's 4 times slower without end-locs compared to with end-locs on my branch. I does use the same SourceManager for the 46K references and I verified that it uses the same buffers, etc. I'll put the numbers here again for readability. > For my little benchmark, I used the LLVM/Clang/Clangd code base which I > queried for all references of "std" (the namespace) which is around 46K > references in the index. > > With end-loc in index: 3.45s on average (20 samples) > With end-loc computed on the fly: 11.33s on average (20 samples) > I also tried with Xcode but without too much success: it took about 30 secs > to reach 45K results and then carried on for a long time and hung (although I > didn't try to leave it for hours to see if it finished). >> I think it's useful to highlight something even when the name is not there. >> For example in "MyClass o1, o2;" it feels natural that o1 and o2 would get >> highlighted. > > To clarify, even with implicit references the start loc points to something. > In this case the implicit references can have start locs for the o1 and o2 > identifiers and the end result for the UI will be the same (o1 and o2 get > highlighted) even without having end-locs for all references. It's the same but slower. IMO, the trade off is not great. It's entirely subjective but I think 4-10 times slower in order to save an integer per occurrence is not worth it from my point of view. > Even without end-loc, the start loc could point to MyStringRef and you could > highlight it. (Same here, it's doable but faster if already in the index.) >> It does? I can only seem to do a textual search. > > The example I tried is the following. If you could file a bug report for the > test case that did not work as you expected it would be much appreciated! Sure, I'll give that a try and isolate it as much as I can. BTW, does it work for you on the LLVM code base? https://reviews.llvm.org/D39050 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
