hokein added a comment. In D76770#1941603 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76770#1941603>, @sammccall wrote:
> Does this regress the case where you complete a file rather than a directory? > e.g. `#include "foo/^one.h"` > If you select "two.h", then we definitely want to replace "one.h", right? yes, it has a regression, but we don't change the behavior for the above case. A regression case is like #include "foo/^dir1/one.h" // with two candidates: dir2 and foo.h if we choose 2), after completion, `"foo/foo.h/one.h"` (now) vs `foo/foo.h` (before) > The root here is that we have to decide what to replace independently of the > completion item. > One compromise might be to replace up to the quote, but if you're completing > `"foo/^one.h"` and `bar` is a directory, check if `foo/bar/one.h` exists and > offer it as a completion. Seems complicated though. agree, it doesn't seem to be worth the effort. > Or we can take the tradeoff here if it's better but it'd be good to > understand why. it was originally reported by one internal user. I think the new behavior (with this patch) - is more aligned with mental model of code completion (most people think code completion just inserts the code text at the cursor position ) - keeps the consistent behavior with other code completions, e.g. `foo.^member()` if you select the `member` in code completion, another `member` text will be inserted Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76770/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76770 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
