hokein added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.cpp:275 +bool operator<(const HighlightingToken &L, const HighlightingToken &R) { + return std::tie(L.R, L.Kind) < std::tie(R.R, R.Kind);; +} ---------------- nit: remove the redundant `;`. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:35 + std::vector<int>> +getHighlightingsAnnotated(llvm::StringRef Code) { Annotations Test(Code); ---------------- could we split it into three functions? - getExpectedHighlightings - getActualHighlightings - getExpectedEmptyLines ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:70 +void checkDiffedHighlights(const char *OrgCode, const char *NewCode) { + std::vector<HighlightingToken> CompleteTokens1; ---------------- nit: OrgCode => OldCode, use llvm::StringRef ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:98 + for (unsigned I = 0, End = ActualDiffed.size(); I < End; ++I) + llvm::sort(ActualDiffed[I].Tokens); + ---------------- I think the tokens are also sorted, as we pass two sorted lists of highlightings to `diffHighlightings`. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:282 + std::vector<std::pair<const char *, const char *>> TestCases{{ + R"cpp( + int $Variable[[A]] ---------------- nit: the code indentation is strange ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/SemanticHighlightingTests.cpp:283 + R"cpp( + int $Variable[[A]] + double $Variable[[B]]; ---------------- The annotations in the OldCode are not used -- you only use the actual highlightings in the `checkDiffedHighlights`. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64475/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64475 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits