Review Request 123944: Correctly build uses for declarations inside macro expansion

[Sergey Kalinichev]

> On March 21, 2016, 12:30 p.m., Kevin Funk wrote:
> > @Sergey: What about this one? Still relevant? Please rebase then.

Right, I completely forgot about this one. Yes, it's still relevant. Though this solution is far from being perfect, a much better way to handle it would be to fix libclang itself. But I'm not really planning to do that, so I think I'll commit the test case from this review and remove incorrect assumptions about macro scopes from the code. Then it's ok to close it.


- Sergey


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123944/#review93810
-----------------------------------------------------------


On May 30, 2015, 6:58 p.m., Sergey Kalinichev wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123944/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 30, 2015, 6:58 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Repository: kdev-clang
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Clang gives the same range for all declarations inside a macro expansion. It's impossible to find their uses by range, so let's try to do it by name.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   duchain/builder.cpp b64d4e0 
>   duchain/clanghelpers.cpp 78c2091 
>   duchain/cursorkindtraits.h a623861 
>   tests/test_duchain.h e3fae31 
>   tests/test_duchain.cpp 06bb961 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/123944/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sergey Kalinichev
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20160326/e4cf2094/attachment.html>