HighCommander4 wrote: Ok, I see. (I was confused because nothing in the patch looks at the contents of `Symbol::DocComment` other than an `empty()` check; maybe a `bool HasDocComment` flag is sufficient?)
I'll have a more detailed look when I get a chance, but one suggestion I wanted to make in the meantime: for changes that add new information to the index, it helps to have a sense of how large of an increase to the index's disk and memory footprint they entail. In the past, I've measured this with the LLVM codebase's index as a "test case". The disk footprint can be measured with a simple `du -hs .cache/clangd/index` or similar. For the memory footprint, we have a `$/memoryUsage` protocol extension that provides this information (the `background_index` entry in particular is of interest). Perhaps you would be interested in taking some before/after measurements along these lines? Feel free to choose a different codebase than LLVM as the test case, especially if you know of one that uses "doc comments at the definition" as the prevailing style. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67802 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
