[clangd-dev] Syntax highlighting of keywords

[Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via clangd-dev]

Does this affect performance in some meaningful way?  If not, I don't understand the motivation to drop primitive keyword highlighting.

> On Oct 25, 2019, at 02:55, Ilya Biryukov via clangd-dev <clangd-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Highlighting typedefs to primitive types in a special manner seems ok, I was referring specifically to highlightings of keywords.
> 
> So unless anyone objects, I'll send a patch to remove highlightings of keywords. Typedefs to simple types will still be highlighted with 'primitive' highlighting type.
> 
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:21 AM Haojian Wu <hokein at google.com <mailto:hokein at google.com>> wrote:
> I agree editors handle keyword highlightings very well, but they don't have sufficient knowledge to highlight typealias/typedefs for primitive types.
> 
> // We want to highlight A, B as primitive types.
> using A = int;
> typedef int B;
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 9:59 AM Ilya Biryukov <ibiryukov at google.com <mailto:ibiryukov at google.com>> wrote:
> Hi clangd-dev,
> 
> I was wondering whether there's any value in the highlighting for "primitive" types being added on keywords like 'void', 'int', etc?
> 
> - Any editor handles those with default syntax highlight.
> - It's trivial and does not require actual semantic knowledge.
> 
> With that in mind, I wonder whether we should drop this completely and just let the editors handle the keywords?
> What do people think?
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Ilya Biryukov
> 
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Ilya Biryukov
> _______________________________________________
> clangd-dev mailing list
> clangd-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:clangd-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clangd-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clangd-dev>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/clangd-dev/attachments/20191025/b510cd1f/attachment-0001.html>