Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
It's feasible, but not with the current API that cpptools exports. Cpptools would need the whole project information up front, whereas we currently only ask for source files as they are needed for IntelliSense. This is something we've been thinking about because in order to enable further codebase unification between VS and VS Code C++ implementations we'd need to treat the workspace more like a "project" and have all the configuration information in the database at the earliest point possible (like VS does) instead of "on demand" like we're currently doing in cpptools. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
3 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
My understanding is that CMake Tools provides info to cpptools, acting as a "configuration provider", which cpptools uses to provide features like Go to Reference. Currently, under a certain set of circumstances I don't fully understand, the combination of CMake Tools with cpptools (at least when using CMake Presets) identifies candidates for Go to Reference which are not in any source file group for the currently selected and configured CMake project, or reachable in the source file through
#include
-ed files. A repro for this is available here.When I say "source file groups", I'm referring to the thing which CMake Tools receives from the CMake File API for target-build-config combos.
Is this something that CMake Tools / cpptools (or the combination of the two) could reasonably provide a better user experience for? Would there be any drawbacks to doing this, or considerations which make this infeasible or impractical?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions