ioeric added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D51297#1228441, @kbobyrev wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D51297#1225546, @ilya-biryukov wrote: > > > I would stamp this from my side, but concerns whether we should recommend > > YCM's LSP-based completer instead are probably still there. > > @sammccall, WDYT? > > > Yes, I can see your point, but I think this is better than nothing (which we > currently have). Also, having the guide in LanguageClient-neovim Wiki might > be easier for the users since they can change something (e.g. when the plugin > is updated and the docs become outdated) and have an easier time finding out > about the option. > > Would love to hear some feedback from @ioeric and @sammccall. I also support having some instructions/pointers on editor integration. That said, I think we should have a section "Editor integration" with a list of editor clients that are known to work with clangd, instead of having a section just for vim. Something like: #Editor (or client?) integration ##Vim Some LSP clients that are known to work with clangd: - nvim, LanguageClient-neovim .. - ... ## vscode ## emacs? What do you think? https://reviews.llvm.org/D51297 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
