Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
[clangd] Run code completion on each token coverd by --check-lines
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
In --check mode we do not run code completion because it is too slow,
especially on larger files. With the introducation of --check-lines we
can narrow down the scope and thus we can afford to do code completion.

We vlog() the top completion result, but that's not really the point.
The most value will come from being able to reproduce crashes that occur
during code completion and require preamble build or index (and thus are
more difficult to reproduce with -code-complete-at).

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103538
  • Loading branch information
gislan committed Jun 4, 2021
1 parent 8a4d05d commit eba3ee0
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 22 additions and 7 deletions.
20 changes: 15 additions & 5 deletions clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/Check.cpp
Expand Up @@ -193,10 +193,15 @@ class Checker {

// Run AST-based features at each token in the file.
void testLocationFeatures(
llvm::function_ref<bool(const Position &)> ShouldCheckLine) {
llvm::function_ref<bool(const Position &)> ShouldCheckLine,
const bool EnableCodeCompletion) {
log("Testing features at each token (may be slow in large files)");
auto &SM = AST->getSourceManager();
auto SpelledTokens = AST->getTokens().spelledTokens(SM.getMainFileID());

CodeCompleteOptions CCOpts = Opts.CodeComplete;
CCOpts.Index = &Index;

for (const auto &Tok : SpelledTokens) {
unsigned Start = AST->getSourceManager().getFileOffset(Tok.location());
unsigned End = Start + Tok.length();
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -233,8 +238,12 @@ class Checker {
auto Hover = getHover(*AST, Pos, Style, &Index);
vlog(" hover: {0}", Hover.hasValue());

// FIXME: it'd be nice to include code completion, but it's too slow.
// Maybe in combination with a line restriction?
if (EnableCodeCompletion) {
Position EndPos = offsetToPosition(Inputs.Contents, End);
auto CC = codeComplete(File, EndPos, Preamble.get(), Inputs, CCOpts);
vlog(" code completion: {0}",
CC.Completions.empty() ? "<empty>" : CC.Completions[0].Name);
}
}
}
};
Expand All @@ -243,7 +252,8 @@ class Checker {

bool check(llvm::StringRef File,
llvm::function_ref<bool(const Position &)> ShouldCheckLine,
const ThreadsafeFS &TFS, const ClangdLSPServer::Options &Opts) {
const ThreadsafeFS &TFS, const ClangdLSPServer::Options &Opts,
bool EnableCodeCompletion) {
llvm::SmallString<0> FakeFile;
llvm::Optional<std::string> Contents;
if (File.empty()) {
Expand All @@ -267,7 +277,7 @@ bool check(llvm::StringRef File,
if (!C.buildCommand(TFS) || !C.buildInvocation(TFS, Contents) ||
!C.buildAST())
return false;
C.testLocationFeatures(ShouldCheckLine);
C.testLocationFeatures(ShouldCheckLine, EnableCodeCompletion);

log("All checks completed, {0} errors", C.ErrCount);
return C.ErrCount == 0;
Expand Down
9 changes: 7 additions & 2 deletions clang-tools-extra/clangd/tool/ClangdMain.cpp
Expand Up @@ -62,7 +62,8 @@ namespace clangd {
// Implemented in Check.cpp.
bool check(const llvm::StringRef File,
llvm::function_ref<bool(const Position &)> ShouldCheckLine,
const ThreadsafeFS &TFS, const ClangdLSPServer::Options &Opts);
const ThreadsafeFS &TFS, const ClangdLSPServer::Options &Opts,
bool EnableCodeCompletion);

namespace {

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -929,7 +930,11 @@ clangd accepts flags on the commandline, and in the CLANGD_FLAGS environment var
uint32_t Line = Pos.line + 1; // Position::line is 0-based.
return Line >= Begin && Line <= End;
};
return check(Path, ShouldCheckLine, TFS, Opts)
// For now code completion is enabled any time the range is limited via
// --check-lines. If it turns out to be to slow, we can introduce a
// dedicated flag for that instead.
return check(Path, ShouldCheckLine, TFS, Opts,
/*EnableCodeCompletion=*/!CheckFileLines.empty())
? 0
: static_cast<int>(ErrorResultCode::CheckFailed);
}
Expand Down

0 comments on commit eba3ee0

Please sign in to comment.