ilya-biryukov added a comment. In D55052#1312766 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55052#1312766>, @hokein wrote:
> For cancellation errors, it might be reasonable, but what if other > unrecoverable errors in clangd (e.g. clangd crashes), in these cases, users > don't know what happens, and would still expect IDE features (like code > completion) to work... Yeah, there are still modes where clangd behaves badly there. Note that the output from that pane is rarely useful anyway as clangd keeps producing errors about accessing non-open files, which would confuse people even more. Overall we never designed this output to be readable by the users, so it's not really useful anyway. There are ways to communicate with the users in the protocol, we should be using them instead to be more user-friendly Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55052/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55052 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
