Summary:
I split out the "extract parent instead of this" logic from the "this isn't
worth extracting" logic (now in eligibleForExtraction()), because I found it
hard to reason about.
While here, handle overloaded as well as builtin assignment operators.
Also this uncovered a bug in getCallExpr() which I fixed.
Reviewers: SureYeaah
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65337
llvm-svn: 368500
Summary:
Whitespace and comments are a clear bugfix: selecting some
comments/space near a statement doesn't mean you're selecting the
surrounding block.
Semicolons are less obvious, but for similar reasons: these tokens
aren't actually claimed by any AST node (usually), so an AST-based model
like SelectionTree shouldn't take them into account.
Callers may still sometimes care about semis of course:
- when the selection is an expr with a non-expr parent, selection of
the semicolon indicates intent to select the statement.
- when a statement with a trailing semi is selected, we need to know
its range to ensure it can be removed.
SelectionTree may or may not play a role here, but these are separate questions
from its core function of describing which AST nodes were selected.
The mechanism here is the TokenBuffer from syntax-trees. We use it in a
fairly low-level way (just to get boundaries of raw spelled tokens). The
actual mapping of AST nodes to coordinates continues to use the (fairly
mature) SourceLocation based logic. TokenBuffer/Syntax trees
don't currently offer an alternative to getFileRange(), I think.
Reviewers: SureYeaah, kadircet
Subscribers: MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, cfe-commits, ilya-biryukov
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65486
llvm-svn: 367453
Summary:
These aren't formally subexpressions in C++, in this case + is left-associative.
However informally +, *, etc are usually (mathematically) associative and users
consider these subexpressions.
We detect these and in simple cases support extracting the partial expression.
As well as builtin associative operators, we assume that overloads of them
are associative and support those too.
Reviewers: SureYeaah
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65139
llvm-svn: 367121
Summary:
Previously TranslationUnitDecl would never be selected.
This means root() is never null, and returns a reference.
commonAncestor() is in principle never null also, but returning TUDecl
here requires tweaks to be careful not to traverse it (this was already
possible when selecting multiple top-level decls, and there are associated bugs!)
Instead, never allow commonAncestor() to return TUDecl, return null instead.
Reviewers: hokein
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65101
llvm-svn: 366893
Summary:
QualifiedTypeLoc isn't treated like a regular citizen by RecursiveASTVisitor.
This meant we weren't intercepting the traversal of its inner TypeLoc.
Most of the changes here are about exposing kind() so we can improve the
precision of our tests.
This should fix the issue raised in D65067.
Reviewers: hokein
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D65100
llvm-svn: 366882
Summary:
- nodes can have special-cased hit ranges including "holes" (FunctionTypeLoc in void foo())
- token conflicts between siblings (int a,b;) are resolved in favor of left sibling
- parent/child overlap is handled statefully rather than explicitly by comparing parent/child
ranges (this lets us share a mechanism with sibling conflicts)
Reviewers: kadircet
Subscribers: ilya-biryukov, MaskRay, jkorous, mgrang, arphaman, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D63760
llvm-svn: 364519
Summary:
This introduces a few new concepts:
- tweaks have an Intent (they don't all advertise as refactorings)
- tweaks may produce messages (for ShowMessage notification). Generalized
Replacements -> Effect.
- tweaks (and other features) may be hidden (clangd -hidden-features flag).
We may choose to promote these one day. I'm not sure they're worth their own
feature flags though.
Verified it in vim-clangd (not yet open source), curious if the UI is ok in VSCode.
Reviewers: ilya-biryukov
Subscribers: mgorny, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, cfe-commits
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D62538
llvm-svn: 363680
Summary:
Motivation:
- this layout is a pain to work with
- without a common root, it's painful to express things like "disable clangd" (D61122)
- CMake/lit configs are a maintenance hazard, and the more the one-off hacks
for various tools are entangled, the more we see apathy and non-ownership.
This attempts to use the bare-minimum configuration needed (while still
supporting the difficult cases: windows, standalone clang build, dynamic libs).
In particular the lit.cfg.py and lit.site.cfg.py.in are merged into lit.cfg.in.
The logic in these files is now minimal.
(Much of clang-tools-extra's lit configs can probably be cleaned up by reusing
lit.llvm.llvm_config.use_clang(), and every llvm project does its own version of
LDPATH mangling. I haven't attempted to fix any of those).
Docs are still in clang-tools-extra/docs, I don't have any plans to touch those.
Reviewers: gribozavr
Subscribers: mgorny, javed.absar, MaskRay, jkorous, arphaman, kadircet, jfb, cfe-commits, ilya-biryukov, thakis
Tags: #clang
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D61187
llvm-svn: 359424
Sam McCall