ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:376
+
+ CompletionItem Item{InsertTextFormat::PlainText};
+
----------------
rwols wrote:
> ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > Implementations of this function in `PlainTextCompletionItemsCollector` and
> > `SnippetCompletionItemsCollector` are the same.
> > Maybe make `ProcessChunks` virtual instead?
> >
> > Or maybe consider replacing inheritance with a `bool` flag. Inheritance
> > does not seem to buy us much here. This looks simpler:
> > ```
> > if (EnableSnippets)
> > ProcessChunksWithSnippets(CCS, Item);
> > else
> > ProcessChunksWithoutSnippets(CCS, Item);
> >
> > ```
> >
> >
> I went with the "make ProcessChunks virtual" approach, wouldn't your
> suggestion have an impact on performance? There'd be a check for every
> completion item now.
Oh, that should not make any difference performance-wise. There is many more
branching on each completion item even if we assume all the function calls are
inlined.
And virtual calls are not free either.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37101
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
