ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.cpp:231
+ if (TP->isFunctionPointerType()) {
+ addToken(Loc, HighlightingKind::Function);
+ return;
----------------
jvikstrom wrote:
> ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > Why do we special-case template parameters, but not other kinds of
> > variables?
> > We definitely need a comment explaining why template parameters are handled
> > in a special way, but variables, parameters, fields are not.
> Not quite sure what you mean about variables/parameters/fields not being
> handled in a special way.
>
> The reason for special casing non type templates is because it probably gives
> more information/is more valuable to highlight a reference/pointer as a
> variable rather than a normal template parameter (same for methods/functions).
>
> But maybe they all should just be highlighted as with the TemplateParameter
> kind instead?
> Not quite sure what you mean about variables/parameters/fields not being
> handled in a special way.
Non-type template parameters are very similar to global and local variables,
function parameters, class fields, etc.
We could also match those on type and highlight differently based on the type.
> The reason for special casing non type templates is because it probably gives
> more information/is more valuable to highlight a reference/pointer as a
> variable rather than a normal template parameter (same for methods/functions).
However, if a global variable has a function pointer type we do not highlight
it as a function. Why would this be different?
> But maybe they all should just be highlighted as with the TemplateParameter
> kind instead?
I would personally vouch for this option. The highlighting functionality lets
me understand what the name resolves to; if it's a template parameter and it
would be highlighted as a variable instead, this would create confusion on my
end. If I need to know the type I'll look at completion results or hover.
It is my personal preference and I'm ok with this going in a different
direction if you feel the opposite is better. Just asking to put the rationale
of this decision (why do this only for template parameters and not other
things) in a comment somewhere in the source code.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66221/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D66221
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
