[PATCH] D38985: [refactor] Add support for editor commands that connect IDEs/editors to the refactoring actions

[Eric Liu via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

ioeric added inline comments.


================
Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/EditorCommandRegistry.def:5
+
+REFACTORING_EDITOR_COMMAND(ExtractFunction, "Extract Function")
+
----------------
Isn't `rename` also supported?


================
Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/EditorCommands.h:23
+/// Editor commands allow refactoring rules to be bound to commands that can
+/// be used from an editor that integrates with Clang's refactoring engine.
+///
----------------
Could you elaborate a bit on the editor/clangd integration? For example, if clangd wants to extract a function, how would clangd discover the rule to use and pass options into the engine? Would editor/clangd be responsible for applying the changes? 


================
Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRule.h:57
+
+  /// Returns the editor command that's was bound to this rule.
+  virtual const EditorCommand *getEditorCommand() { return nullptr; }
----------------
nit: s/that's was/that was/


================
Comment at: include/clang/Tooling/Refactoring/RefactoringActionRule.h:58
+  /// Returns the editor command that's was bound to this rule.
+  virtual const EditorCommand *getEditorCommand() { return nullptr; }
 };
----------------
I'm still not quite sure about the intention of `EditorCommand` (is it supposed to be used as a mapping from name to rule, or the other way around?), but I'm a bit concerned about mixing editor logic with the refactoring rules this way. Also to enable a editor command, it seems to me that we would need to touch both the registry and the rule creation code, which seems a bit cumbersome.

I think we should either 1) separate out the command logic cleanly without touching action/rule interfaces in the refactoring engine or 2) simply bake the logic into the refactoring engine.

It is unclear to me if 1) is possible, but for 2), I think we could introduce a `RefactoringEngine` class which carries all refactoring actions as well as a map to serve the purpose of `EditorCommand`. And I think by doing this, we could also make the interfaces of `RefactoringEngine` more explicit.


Repository:
  rL LLVM

https://reviews.llvm.org/D38985