1. Missing some baselines: For code completion tasks, I suggest that the authors compare with existing code completion commercial applications, such as Copilot. It can be tested on a smaller subset of RepoEval, and it is essential to compare with these state-of-the-art code completion systems.
2. Time efficiency: For code completion tasks, it is also important to focus on the time efficiency. I recommend the authors could add corresponding experiments to make it clear.
3. Missing some related work: Recently there are some papers on similar topics, such as repo-level benchmark [1], API invocation [2]. The authors could consider discussing them in related work to better tease out research directions.
[1] Liu, Tianyang et al. “RepoBench: Benchmarking Repository-Level Code Auto-Completion Systems.” (2023)
[2] Zhang, Kechi et al. “ToolCoder: Teach Code Generation Models to use API search tools.”(2023)
1. Missing some baselines: For code completion tasks, I suggest that the authors compare with existing code completion commercial applications, such as Copilot. It can be tested on a smaller subset of RepoEval, and it is essential to compare with these state-of-the-art code completion systems.