kadircet added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/include/clang/Sema/CodeCompleteConsumer.h:755
- /// Describes the kind of result generated.
- enum ResultKind {
- /// Refers to a declaration.
----------------
egorzhdan wrote:
> kadircet wrote:
> > i don't follow the reason for replacing this struct with
> > `CXCompletionResultKind` and renaming occurrences in half of the codebase.
> > can we keep this around, introduce the new enum type into `Index.h` and
> > have `clang/tools/libclang/CIndexCodeCompletion.cpp` do the conversion from
> > Sema type to Index type instead?
> >
> > Unless I am missing some other requirement for doing so. i feel like the
> > conceptual dependency from Sema to Index is one we should get rid of,
> > rather than make tighter.
> This was mostly done to be consistent with the way `CXCursorKind` and
> `CXAvailabilityKind` are declared in `Index.h` and used as fields of
> `CodeCompletionResult`. I think updating the enum name in a few source files
> shouldn't be a major problem, but I can avoid it if you feel strongly against
> this approach.
I completely agree with the consistency argument, but IMO the conceptual
dependency from clang-sema to clang-cindex is just wrong.
cindex is mostly implemented by `libclang`, which is part of clang-tools. all
of this works today because clang-sema is only using declarations visible in
headers and doesn't properly depend on `libclang` in the build files.
Hence I believe rather than preserving consistency here, we should be moving
towards breaking that dependency over time. Therefore I was opposing the idea
of introducing another type usage that'll make this dependency more strong.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136844/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D136844
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
