(libraries now)
It has been generally agreed that we need to do this reorg, and now
seems like the perfect time. Some major pass reorganization is in the
works.
This does not have to be the final word on the matter. The consensus
among those working on the code is that it's much better than what we
had and a better starting point for future bike shedding.
Note that the previous organization was designed to allow separate
analysis and optimization libraries. It turns out this is an
artificial distinction and not an important goal.
(Headers first)
It has been generally agreed that we need to do this reorg, and now
seems like the perfect time. Some major pass reorganization is in the
works.
This does not have to be the final word on the matter. The consensus
among those working on the code is that it's much better than what we
had and a better starting point for future bike shedding.
Note that the previous organization was designed to allow separate
analysis and optimization libraries. It turns out this is an
artificial distinction and not an important goal.
Conventionally, code completion results are matched with user input solely by
names. However, names are limited in expressiveness. From this comments, we start to
decorate code completion results with @keywords fields extracted from Clang doc comments.
These fields are added by API authors to comment the decl with information that
is not manifested clear enough through names. Code completion users' typing of the
keyword leads to the corresponding code completion results being selected as well.
Keywords can be arbitrarily long and can be multiple.
For instance, a function called "index()" has "@keyword find" in its doc comment.
Users' typing of "find" leads to "index()" being selected in the code completion list.
The code goes into its own sub-tree under 'tools' but tests go under 'test',
so that running 'check-swift' will also run all the SourceKit tests.
SourceKit is disabled on non-darwin platforms.
