ilya-biryukov marked an inline comment as done.
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
One important comment about somehow distinguishing multiple decls with the same
name.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/ClangdUnitTests.cpp:110
+ template<typename T>
+ void f(T) {}
+ void s() {
----------------
jvikstrom wrote:
> ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > Could you also check that:
> >
> > 1. explicit specializations are present
> > ```
> > template <>
> > void f(bool) {}
> > ```
> > 2. explicit instantiations are absent
> > ```
> > template void f(bool);
> > ```
> > 3. partial specializations are present (they should not be affected by this
> > change, but testing those here seems appropriate)
> > ```
> > template <class T>
> > struct vector {};
> >
> > template <class T>
> > struct vector<T*> {}; // partial specialization, should be present
> > ```
> > 4. template variables and classes are also handled:
> > ```
> > template <class T>
> > T foo = 10; // (!) requires C++17
> > ```
> Explicit instantiations are present in topLevelDecls though, otherwise
> RecursiveASTVisitor would not traverse them (so adding a test to make sure
> explicit instantiations are included in toplevel).
>
> Also adding a test to SemanticHighlighting to make sure that explicit
> instantiations are visited in that (is some other RecursiveASTVisitor usage I
> should add this to instead?)
>
Yes, sorry, I forgot about the results of your investigation yesterday.
Having them in top-level decls seems fine, just wanted to make sure we actually
test it.
LG
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/ClangdUnitTests.cpp:134
+ template<class T>
+ struct V<T*> {};
+
----------------
Also add a full specialization (IIRC, they are represented completely
differently in the AST):
```
template <>
struct V<bool> {};
```
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/ClangdUnitTests.cpp:137
+ template<class T>
+ T foo = T(10);
+ int i = foo<int>;
----------------
Also add a partial and a full template specializations for the variable
declaration:
```
template <class T>
int foo<T*> = 0;
template <>
int foo<bool> = 0;
```
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/unittests/ClangdUnitTests.cpp:144
+ EXPECT_THAT(AST.getLocalTopLevelDecls(),
+ ElementsAre(DeclNamed("f"), DeclNamed("f"), DeclNamed("f"),
+ DeclNamed("V"), DeclNamed("V"), DeclNamed("foo"),
----------------
Is there a way to check we are seeing the explicit instantiations? (e.g. by
looking at template arguments?)
It's not clear whether multiple `DeclNamed("foo")` refer to the decls we expect.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65510/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D65510
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
