[cfe-dev] clangd, completion in header files
Christian Dullweber via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Apr 25 07:33:46 PDT 2018
thanks for implementing the heuristics. Header files that have a cc file
with the same name are working great now :)
I found a few issues that I can't really explain. It looks like some
header-only files are matched with a basically random file:
base/no_destructor.h, base/macros.h and base/callback_forward.h are
compiled with commands for third_party/freetype/freetype_source/ftbase.c.
(according to the "-MF obj/third_party/freetype/freetype_source/ftbase.o.d"
compiled with commands for
There are much better matches such as base/callback_helpers.cc or
There are also headers where good commands are choosen, e.g.
components/browsing_data/core/core/browsing_data_utils.cc, so I wonder what
is going wrong with the others files?
I'm using the clangd build 20180424.RC0-1
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:59 PM Sam McCall <sammccall at google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:34 AM Christian Dullweber <
> dullweber at chromium.org> wrote:
>> Sound great, thanks!
>> One interesting case in Chromium might be generated jni headers. I would
>> be interested what the heuristic finds for these files:
> Indeed, it doesn't do well here, but still compiles fine - this seems to
> be the case when the exact flags used don't matter much as long as the
> general project setup is right. Probably quite common in generated files -
> I guess these tend to have relatively few predictable dependencies, and
> might prefer unwieldy fully-qualified include paths where a human would add
> a -I entry. This one includes <jni.h>
> and "../../../../../../../../base/android/jni_generator/jni_generator_helper.h".
> The heuristic fares poorly here because the filename is unique, the last
> few path components (chrome, jni, jni_headers) are unhelpful in locating
> related cc files, and the "nearby in the tree" logic doesn't handle the
> separate root for genfiles well.
> The right file turns out to be e.g.
> "chrome/browser/android/browsing_data/browsing_data_bridge.cc". The only
> useful hints here are chrome/browser (not very specific) and
> BrowsingDataBridge if we used fuzzy word matching to account for case
> differences. I'm inclined not to try to solve this case without more data.
> The only diagnostics produced are a bunch of "internal linkage... but not
> defined" where the header forward declares static functions whose
> implementations are meant to be provided by the including CC file.
> This is an artifact of assuming the .h file is standalone, and it seems
> like a form of non-modularity, but this is a minor issue we can deal with
> in a few ways and unrelated to the choice of flags.
> Relevant logs are:
> client_discourse_context.pb.cc as proxy for
> Rebuilding file
> with command
> ../../third_party/llvm-build/Release+Asserts/bin/clang++ -x c++ -MMD -MF
> -D V8_DEPRECATION_WARNINGS -D NO_TCMALLOC -D SAFE_BROWSING_DB_REMOTE -D
> CHROMIUM_BUILD -D FIELDTRIAL_TESTING_ENABLED -D ANDROID -D HAVE_SYS_UIO_H
> -D ANDROID_NDK_VERSION_ROLL=r16_1 -D CR_CLANG_REVISION="328575-1" -D
> __STDC_CONSTANT_MACROS -D __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS -D COMPONENT_BUILD -D
> __GNU_SOURCE=1 -D CHROMIUM_CXX_TWEAK_INLINES -D _DEBUG -D
> DYNAMIC_ANNOTATIONS_ENABLED=1 -D WTF_USE_DYNAMIC_ANNOTATIONS=1 -D
> GOOGLE_PROTOBUF_NO_RTTI -D GOOGLE_PROTOBUF_NO_STATIC_INITIALIZER -D
> HAVE_PTHREAD -D PROTOBUF_USE_DLLS -I ../.. -I gen -I
> ../../third_party/protobuf/src -I gen/protoc_out -I
> ../../third_party/protobuf/src -fno-strict-aliasing --param
> ssp-buffer-size=4 -fstack-protector -Wno-builtin-macro-redefined -D
> __DATE__= -D __TIME__= -D __TIMESTAMP__= -funwind-tables -fPIC -pipe
> -fcolor-diagnostics -no-canonical-prefixes -ffunction-sections
> -fno-short-enums --target=arm-linux-androideabi -isystem
> ../../third_party/android_ndk/sysroot/usr/include/arm-linux-androideabi -D
> __ANDROID_API__=16 -D __NDK_FPABI__= -D
> HAVE_PTHREAD_COND_TIMEDWAIT_MONOTONIC=1 -march=armv7-a -mfloat-abi=softfp
> -mtune=generic-armv7-a -mfpu=neon -mthumb -Wall -Werror -Wextra
> -Wimplicit-fallthrough -Wthread-safety -Wno-missing-field-initializers
> -Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-c++11-narrowing -Wno-covered-switch-default
> -Wno-unneeded-internal-declaration -Wno-inconsistent-missing-override
> -Wno-undefined-var-template -Wno-nonportable-include-path
> -Wno-address-of-packed-member -Wno-unused-lambda-capture
> -Wno-user-defined-warnings -Wno-enum-compare-switch
> -Wno-null-pointer-arithmetic -Wno-ignored-pragma-optimize -Oz -fno-ident
> -fdata-sections -ffunction-sections -fomit-frame-pointer -gdwarf-3 -g2
> -ggnu-pubnames -fvisibility=hidden -Xclang -load -Xclang
> -Xclang -add-plugin -Xclang find-bad-constructs -Xclang
> -plugin-arg-find-bad-constructs -Xclang check-ipc -Wheader-hygiene
> -Wstring-conversion -Wtautological-overlap-compare
> -Wno-undefined-bool-conversion -Wno-tautological-undefined-compare
> -std=gnu++14 -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -isystem
> ../../third_party/android_ndk/sources/cxx-stl/llvm-libc++/include -isystem
> -isystem ../../third_party/android_ndk/sources/android/support/include
> --sysroot=../../third_party/android_ndk/sysroot -fvisibility-inlines-hidden
> (Yes, the -M flags should really be filtered)
>> the implementation is in:
>> I don't think that will get matched.
>> I don't really care if code completion works in generated files but at
>> least there shouldn't be incorrect error messages in vscode. Is it possible
>> to exclude a folder from being analyzed by clangd?
> Not currently, it'll look at anything with a supported extension.
> It's not obvious to me how to manage either heuristically or via
> configuration in a way that's easy to use, so unless people have ideas I'd
> punt on this and try to improve the results instead.
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 1:50 AM, Sam McCall <sammccall at google.com> wrote:
>>> Looks like our mail crossed :)
>>> Cquery's success with this is another point in favor.
>>> I have a prototype in https://reviews.llvm.org/D45006 (+ 2-line patch
>>> to enable in clangd: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45007).
>>> It seems to work pretty well at first glance, but it needs rigorous
>>> testing. If anyone's feeling this pain, feel free to try it out!
>>> It does a little bit of indexing to avoid traversing all the entries
>>> every time, not sure if that's worth it.
>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 9:58 PM Fāng-ruì Sòng via cfe-dev <
>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>> Another heuristic solution:
>>>> Enumerate all compilation database entries and calculate the matching
>>>> score for each entry with the target file
>>>> Bonus for common leading components
>>>> Penalty for diverged path components
>>>> Bonus for common trailing characters sans filename extension (e.g.
>>>> Match.cc Match.h are the same sans extension)
>>>> This heuristic is used in cquery.
>>>> Add another point for textDocument/didOpen on an unseen filename:
>>>> The inferred command line options are not authoritative, they should be
>>>> overriden by other translation units when later it turns out the header
>>>> file is included by some entry in the compilation database.
>>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 7:12 AM Christian Dullweber via cfe-dev <
>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>> I recently tried to use clangd for Chromium in vscode and hit the same
>>>>> I experimented a bit with generating a compile_commands.json file with
>>>>> valid rules for headers and came to this solution:
>>>>> I sorted all .cc filenames and then looked up the index of the closest
>>>>> match for each header using binary search. As there were some edge
>>>>> cases like the first or last file in a directory, I additionally compared
>>>>> which file at the index has the largest prefix with the header.
>>>>> I found a few issues with system headers and some generated protobuf
>>>>> headers but otherwise it works well.
>>>>> Native support from clangd would be amazing :)
>>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-dev