Remove IdentifierEndsWith() declaration

[bstaletic]

Just like @oblitum pointed out in #701(comment), in CompletionData.cpp the IdentifierEndsWith() function is called only from function RemoveTrailingParens() and both functions are in unnamed namespace, so neither should have declaration in CompletionData.h.

@oblitum, in his comment, mentions that he had noticed more odd changes in that PR. While this commit fixes the change he explicitely mentioned I would like to wait and see if he has to add anything else.

---

This change is 

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #732 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #732   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.16%   93.16%           
=======================================
  Files          79       79           
  Lines        5267     5267           
  Branches      155      155           
=======================================
  Hits         4907     4907           
  Misses        301      301           
  Partials       59       59

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 2ef1ae0...824a36c. Read the comment docs.

[Valloric]

Thanks for the PR!

I'm also fine with submitting this as-is and handling separate PRs for any future issues.

[bstaletic]

Thanks for the PR!

Just cleaning up after myself. :D

I'm also fine with submitting this as-is and handling separate PRs for any future issues.

While I have nothing too much against it, I feel like a single PR covering all the little mistakes made is better than a bunch of tiny ones. So I was thinking about letting this stay for a week or two (or even a month) and give us time to notice and report everything we find wrong.

---

Review status: 0 of 1 files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved.

---

Comments from Reviewable

[Valloric]

While I have nothing too much against it, I feel like a single PR covering all the little mistakes made is better than a bunch of tiny ones. So I was thinking about letting this stay for a week or two (or even a month) and give us time to notice and report everything we find wrong.

Whatever floats your boat. :)

[vheon]

So I was thinking about letting this stay for a week or two (or even a month) and give us time to notice and report everything we find wrong.

I'm not sure what values would add to leave this open in "hope" to find something else.

[bstaletic]

@vheon The only reason behind me thinking like that is the oblitum's comment stating he had noticed "some weird additions" (i.e. plural), so I thought he might have something to add to this.

But like I said, that's just an idea and I'm not that strongly against meging this as is.

[oblitum]

I don't recall anything anymore that was actual wrong code. I didn't review all of it, just brushed over when merging in my repo and noticed several refactoring changes whose rationale I had no idea for, one of those happened to be caught in my radar while I was trying to make sense of it.

[bstaletic]

@oblitum I took a better look at the #701 changes before submitting this PR. Everything else seems fine to me. There are things like #include <cstdlib> that seem out of place, but there was a real need for those.

Feel free to ask about anything that seems odd or out of place and I'll be glad to address all of your questions.

@vheon @Valloric I guess this can be merged.

[vheon]

@homu r=Valloric

[homu]

📌 Commit 824a36c has been approved by Valloric

[homu]

⚡ Test exempted - status