sammccall added a comment. In D120306#3337288 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120306#3337288>, @kbobyrev wrote:
> In D120306#3337212 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D120306#3337212>, @sammccall > wrote: > >> What's the policy this patch intends to implement? >> >> I'm a little concerned by building up maps of filenames with segment limits >> - it looks like some kind of heuristic/partial matching. > > Basically, handling the mappings that. IWYU pragmas provide. Yes, I'm asking you to describe that handling in a couple of sentences so I can understand what you intend it to be. e.g. for includecleaner in general, the approach is: walk the AST, map each node to decls it uses, map decls to locations, map locations to files, then check which includes point to files that were not identified. > Are you concerned about the limit itself or the way I'm trying to find these > headers in general? I was afraid of consuming too much memory, hence the > limit; it's not crucial to the implementation, though, I can remove it if > your concern is the limit rather than the approach. Mostly I'm unclear on: - whether we're comparing filenames among a small (e.g. the include stack - heuristics OK) or a large set (need to be very precise) - whether the partial matching is semantically important or a performance optimitzation - whether the concept of "real name" is significant or likely to cause problems - whether storing another copy of the names of all the transitive headers is actually necessary for what you're trying to do Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D120306/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D120306 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
