sammccall added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/support/MemoryTree.h:36 + /// No copy of the \p Name. + MemoryTree *addChild(llvm::StringLiteral Name) { return &createChild(Name); } + ---------------- sammccall wrote: > actually, why do these return pointers rather than references? reading call sites, `child()` might be both more fluent and more accurate than `addChild` - we're not calling it for the side effect and there may or may not be one. ================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/support/MemoryTree.h:49 + /// with dots("."). + void traverseTree(llvm::function_ref<void(size_t /*Size*/, + llvm::StringRef /*ComponentName*/)> ---------------- sammccall wrote: > nit: need to be explicit whether this is self or subtree (or could pass both) I think it'd be worth having `size_t total()` with a comment that it traverses the tree. We have places where we only want this info (e.g. log messages) and it's probably nice in unit tests too. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D88411/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D88411 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits