ilya-biryukov added a comment.
The **idea** of using the AST-based approach here was really nice, it was less
expensive and seemed to clearly look at the semantic.
I wonder if there's a way to keep it on the AST level, without looking at the
source locations.
What are the cases we're trying to filter out? Only implicit constructor or
anything else?
================
Comment at: unittests/clangd/XRefsTests.cpp:1228
+TEST(FindReferences, ExplicitSymbols) {
+ const char *Tests[] = {
----------------
I'm missing what does this test actually tests.
The absence of implicit references (I guess constructor expressions)?
================
Comment at: unittests/clangd/XRefsTests.cpp:1259
+ namespace ns {
+ using [fo^o];
+ }
----------------
Shouldn't the `usings` always be qualified? Isn't this a compiler error?
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55191/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55191
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
