malaperle added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/clangd/Features.rst:264 +-------------------------------------+------------+----------+ -| Type hierarchy | No | No | +| Type hierarchy | No | Yes | +-------------------------------------+------------+----------+ ---------------- nridge wrote: > sammccall wrote: > > nridge wrote: > > > Should I perhaps change type hierarchy's entry in the LSP column from > > > "No" to "Proposed"? > > I'm not sure what "no" means, if it doesn't mean "proposed". > > > > Changing the "no" links to say "proposal" and link to it would be useful, I > > think. > > (And we could delete any rows that don't have a proposal) > Good idea -- I'll look at that in a separate commit. The rows that have "no" and don't have proposals meant that we wanted to make proposals for the LSP eventually in order to match other IDEs feature. Many didn't have proposals at the time. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64614/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64614 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
