[PATCH] D85316: [SyntaxTree] Proposition of new tree dump

[Eduardo Caldas via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

eduucaldas added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/unittests/Tooling/Syntax/TreeTest.cpp:3363
+    | |-'if' IntroducerKeyword I
+    | |-'(' I
+    | |-BinaryOperatorExpression I
----------------
Some points to make a decision. 
What should be the order of these extra information?
I like the order now, Most frequent in the left.

More decriptive markers?
We could choose to have more descriptive markers
`I` -> `unmodifieable`
`M`-> `not backed by source code` / `synthesized`

Ambiguity.
Since we choose to not dump a role for `NodeRole::Unknown` we might have some ambiguity between NodeRoles and markers. We can avoid that by surrounding markers, or making them lower-case. or even by just leaving one character markers




Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D85316/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D85316