Okay - I don't understand how the class works well enough to be certain
that will do the same thing, but if you do, I've no problem taking your
word for it. Should I resend the patch with that change?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Manuel Klimek <kli...@google.com> wrote:
> - if (!Compilations)
> - llvm::report_fatal_error(ErrorMessage);
> + if (!Compilations) {
> + errs() << "Compilation database not found - using default options\n";
> + int argc = 1;
> + const char *argv[] = {"--"};
> + Compilations.reset(
> + FixedCompilationDatabase::loadFromCommandLine(argc, argv));
>
>
> Just Compilations.reset(new FixedCompilationDatabase(".",
> std::vector<std::string>()))?
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:51 AM Russell Wallace via cfe-commits <
> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Per discussion at
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-December/046321.html allow
>> tools to work in the absence of a compilation database, but warn the user
>> about the absence.
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-commits mailing list
>> cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>>
>
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
