[PATCH] D47762: [clangd] Boost code completion results that are narrowly scoped (local, members)

[Eric Liu via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

ioeric added inline comments.


================
Comment at: unittests/clangd/QualityTests.cpp:1
 //===-- SourceCodeTests.cpp  ------------------------------------*- C++ -*-===//
 //
----------------
sammccall wrote:
> ioeric wrote:
> > sammccall wrote:
> > > ioeric wrote:
> > > > Could you also add a test case for code completion?
> > > The code completion scoring is tested in SymbolRelevanceSignalsSanity: file scope is boosted compared to default when the query is code-complete, but not when it's generic.
> > > 
> > > What kind of test do you mean?
> > I was thinking a test case that covers the changes in CodeComplete.cpp e.g. check that Relevance and Quality play well together, and locals/members are boosted? Would that make sense?
> Actually one of the purposes of pulling out the `Quality` module is to stop writing such tests :-)
> They're fragile because ranking depends on many factors, e.g. at the moment you can't construct a completion candidate with a different scope that won't also get a different sema priority, so it's not clear why a test is passing/failing.
> And for every signal, you need a test in code complete, and in workspace symbols...
> 
> It *would* be useful to have a smoke test in CodeCompletion to make sure we're using those scores. Maybe it would make sense to turn ReferencesAffectRanking or so into that?
That makes sense. A smoke test in code completion sounds good.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D47762