ilya-biryukov added a comment. In D72498#1815500 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D72498#1815500>, @lh123 wrote:
> - hover over the `front` , you'll see "instance-method `front` → > `std::vector<int, class std::allocator<int> >::reference`". > - hover over the `push_back`, you'll see "`std::vector<int, class > std::allocator<int> >::value_type && __x`". These look terrible and are the great examples where showing canonical types results in better output than canonical types. I wonder why we add `std::vector<int, class std::allocator<int>>::` in the first place, I believe the standard library uses `value_type` in the declaration. Showing `value_type` is not great, but at least that doesn't uglify what was written in the code in the first place. FWIW, I think the perfect output in those cases would be `int (aka value_type)` Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D72498/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D72498 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
