[PATCH] D62459: [clangd] Serialization support for RelationSlab

[Kadir Cetinkaya via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

kadircet accepted this revision.
kadircet added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.

LG, thanks for the patch!



================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/index/Serialization.cpp:34
+  switch (Role) {
+  case index::SymbolRole::RelationBaseOf: {
+    return RelationKind::BaseOf;
----------------
nit: no need for braces


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/index/Serialization.cpp:44
+  switch (Kind) {
+  case RelationKind::BaseOf: {
+    return index::SymbolRole::RelationBaseOf;
----------------
nit: braces


================
Comment at: clang-tools-extra/clangd/index/Serialization.h:81
+// Used for serializing SymbolRole as used in Relation.
+enum class RelationKind : uint8_t { ChildOf = 1, BaseOf };
+llvm::Expected<RelationKind> symbolRoleToRelationKind(index::SymbolRole);
----------------
nridge wrote:
> nridge wrote:
> > nridge wrote:
> > > kadircet wrote:
> > > > kadircet wrote:
> > > > > why not start from zero?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Also let's change the `index::SymbolRole` in `Relation` with this one.
> > > > why not just store baseof ? do we need both directions for typehierarchy?
> > > > Also let's change the index::SymbolRole in Relation with this one.
> > > 
> > > You previously asked for the opposite change in [this comment](https://reviews.llvm.org/D59407?id=190785#inline-525734) :)
> > > 
> > > Did your opinion change?
> > > why not start from zero?
> > 
> > The original motivation was so that we had a distinct value to return in case of an error. However, now that we use `llvm_unreachable` that doesn't seem to be necessary any more.
> > why not just store baseof ? do we need both directions for typehierarchy?
> 
> In the future, we may want to be able to look up supertypes in the index as well (for example, to handle scenarios where a type that is only forward-declared in the current TU is queried).
> 
> However, we can add that later, and just focus on subtypes for now, which only require BaseOf.
ahaha good catch :D for some reason I thought we were also storing our own struct in `Symbol` for `SmybolInfo` but apparently we are not. Just ignore that one.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D62459/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D62459