[PATCH] D64475: [clangd] Duplicate lines of semantic highlightings sent removed.

[Johan Vikström via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

jvikstrom added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/ClangdLSPServer.cpp:1110
     PathRef File, std::vector<HighlightingToken> Highlightings) {
+  llvm::ArrayRef<HighlightingToken> Prev;
+  {
----------------
hokein wrote:
> this seems unsafe, we get a reference of the map value, we might access it without the mutex being guarded. 
> 
> ```
> std::vector<HighlightingToken> Old;
> {
>     std::lock_guard<std::mutex> Lock(HighlightingsMutex);
>     Old = std::move(FileToHighlightings[File]);
> }
> ```
Aren't the parsing callbacks thread safe in the same file? I think @sammccall said so above. 

Although actually, the map might reallocate and move around the memory if things are inserted/deleted invalidating the reference maybe (I have no idea of how StringMap memory allocation works).

So I guess it doesn't hurt to be safe and copy it.   


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/SemanticHighlighting.cpp:255
+  // ArrayRefs to the current line in the highlights.
+  ArrayRef<HighlightingToken> NewLine(Highlightings.data(),
+                                      Highlightings.data()),
----------------
hokein wrote:
> IIUC, we are initializing an empty ArrayRef, if so, how about using `NewLine(Highlightings.data(), /*length*/0)`? `NewLine(Highlightings.data(), Highlightings.data())` is a bit weird, it took me a while to understand the purpose.
I couldn't do that because the `ArrayRef(const T *data, size_t length)` and `ArrayRef(const T *begin, const T *end)` were ambiguous. Added a cast to cast 0 to a size_t which solved it.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D64475/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D64475