vsapsai added a comment. In D148776#4328425 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D148776#4328425>, @dblaikie wrote:
> Got a link to a design discussion motivating this change? No design discussion. I though that doing less work is not contentious. > I'd have thought it made sense to put modulemaps in subdirectories - since > they cover the whole directory, putting them in the root of an include path > would be problematic if there are multiple distinct projects in that same > path. And I didn't think this involved searching through subdirectories, but > walking up parent directories from the included file... When we look for a module map covering a header - you are right, we are walking up parent directories from the included file. But when we are looking up a module by name (for example, when we load a module), there is no included file and we need to look for a module top-down instead of bottom-up. Your suggested approach to put module maps in corresponding subdirectories works when the names are the same, for example, module "blue" in directory "blue", that remains unchanged. But, for example, module "LLVM_DebugInfo" in directory "llvm" is not obvious. And there is no indication it //must// be in directory "llvm" and not in "llvm-c" or in some other directory, so clang checks all subdirectories. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D148776/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D148776 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
