aaron.ballman added a comment. In D148439#4303202 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D148439#4303202>, @kbobyrev wrote:
> The difference is that `clang-rename` is a stand-alone binary with CLI > whereas `clangd` isn't typically used as such (it can be, but it's a weird > use-case). > > I don't know if there are any existing users out there, if there are then I > assume there are very few. > > It was created as an intern project long ago (I guess 2014/2015?) and was in > a semi-functional state, and then when I was an intern in 2016 I improved it > significantly and built the integration with Vim and updated one for Emacs. > We had some use-cases, but AFAIK there are none anymore at Google, and I > believe most users we had were there. > > Personally, I don't see any reason to keep `clang-rename` and support it, I > don't think it's useful anymore. But this is Open-Source world so some people > might object. I think it's worth seeing if we can remove it, as it reduces around maintenance burden, build times, repo size, etc (all very, very slightly though, so I'm fine if folks push back). I'll put together an RFC to see if there is resistance to the idea. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148439/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D148439 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
