ilya-biryukov added a comment. Sam, thanks for taking a look and the useful comments!
@ioeric, I second Sam's suggestion to split the compile command and the fallback action into two changes. This would make it easier to review those in isolation. Could you do this please? ================ Comment at: clangd/TUScheduler.h:204 + Callback<InputsAndPreamble> Action, + bool AllowFallback = false); ---------------- sammccall wrote: > I think this isn't orthogonal to `PreambleConsistency`. > When would we use AllowFallback = true but PreambleConsistency = Consistent? > > Two possible options: > - adding a new `StaleOrAbsent` option to PreambleConsistency > - changing `Stale` to these new semantics, as codeComplete is the only caller > The problem with the latter is we can't put it behind a flag. Ah, I was totally looking past the `PreambleConsistency` flag. Thanks for spotting this. Indeed, modeling the fallback in the `PreambleConsistency` would make sense. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D59811/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D59811 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
