[PATCH] D38985: [refactor] Add support for editor commands that connect IDEs/editors to the refactoring actions
Alex Lorenz via Phabricator via cfe-commits
cfe-commits at lists.llvm.org
Tue Oct 24 11:22:24 PDT 2017
arphaman added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D38985#901152, @sammccall wrote:
> Hi Alex! I'm working on clangd, but am pretty new to the project, so forgive some naive questions.
> I'm a bit unclear at a high level what the new abstractions in this patch add, in terms of wiring refactorings up to clangd and other tools.
> My understanding is: we have a hierarchy of refactorings consisting of actions (roughly: user intent?) and rules (roughly: implementations).
> Clangd needs to be able to:
> - enumerate the actions and their associated rules: possible via `createRefactoringActions()`
> - find names for these (machine readable and human readable): possible at the `Action` level, not `Rule` yet
> - determine whether rules can be applied and what configuration is needed: possible via the `Rule` API
> - invoke rules: possible via the `Rule` API
> So AFAICT, clangd could be hooked up to the existing Refactor API, without `EditorCommand` or `EditorClient`. What's the gain?
- EditorCommand is not a necessity, but an abstraction to keep the rule simple. I thought it'd be good to have them in a registry for some libclang uses (particularly mapping to C API enums), but on a second though I think that this can be avoided. I'll avoid the class altogether then.
- EditorClient simplifies the editor operation and will be reused in libclang.
More information about the cfe-commits