sammccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/include/clang/Sema/Sema.h:11968 bool AfterAmpersand); + void CodeCompleteFunctionDeleteAndDefaultSpecifier(); ---------------- nit: "specifier" isn't an accurate term here. I don't know that there is one, and it seems better to name the method after the situation rather than the concrete completions it might offer. Maybe just CodeCompleteAfterFunctionEquals? ================ Comment at: clang/lib/Sema/SemaCodeComplete.cpp:6274 + // special functions. + Results.AddResult("default"); + // FIXME(liuhui): Ideally, we should only provide `delete` completion for the ---------------- I'm not sure offering default whether it's valid or not is an improvement over never offering it. I think the following checks are easy to implement based on the `Declarator` and "good enough": - offered for destructors - offered for operator= (regardless of signature) - offered for constructors with 0 or 1 arguments (regardless of type) - optional: offered for operator<, operator>, operator==, operator<=> (if C++20 is enabled, even if this is not a member function!) In particular, we shouldn't offer =default for arbitrary methods (consider `= 0` on a virtual method), and we shouldn't offer it for non-members (I think currently it will be offered outside class context) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D82548/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D82548 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits