Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

I'll try and figure out who that was on Monday and loop them in. I'm not sure what problems the previous person ran into, but the test suite passes, i can run it on a large codebase, and all the results look fine and as if the tool is working. Hopefully the previous person has more insight into wha

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

For years nobody worked on Windows support, so I'm somewhat surprised this is suddenly time critical. Usually the way this works is that we add the feature to upstream cmake, and then make a recent enough cmake a requirement for tooling. There's no need to make it a requirement for anything else. T

Re: [PATCH] D23476: Allow manual specification of the binary directory in check_clang_tidy.py

The script was never intended to be run manually. Its interface is rather inconvenient for this. If you need to run a single test, it's easier to do using llvm-lit (`path/to/lit test/file.cpp`). But if you for some reason want to run the script directly, it should be possible to just modify PATH or

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

According to the existing spec [ http://clang.llvm.org/docs/JSONCompilationDatabase.html], the command field "must be a valid command to rerun the exact compilation step for the translation unit in the environment the build system uses.". So copying compilation databases across environments with i

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

Also, compilation database support with CMake works correctly on Windows. It generates Windows command lines which need to be tokenized using Windows command line rules (hence why this patch makes clang-tidy work on Windows) On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:30 PM Zachary Turner wrote: > I'm not disagre

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

I'm not disagreeing that it would be nice if CMake supported this. It's probably worth trying to do even. But do we want to block having a working clang-tidy for clang-cl for months because of that? Even if we can upstream the patch, how long before we up the minimum required CMake version? The s

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016, 10:17 PM Zachary Turner wrote: > The json is generated by CMake, so I don't thinks we can do this without > patching CMake, which is a non-starter. > Why? We did add compilation database support to cmake in the first place. Back then I did not support windows, btw, so I'd b

Re: [PATCH] D23343: [clang-tidy] modernize-make-{smart_ptr} private ctor bugfix

Prazek updated this revision to Diff 67967. Prazek added a comment. - fixes https://reviews.llvm.org/D23343 Files: clang-tidy/modernize/MakeSmartPtrCheck.cpp docs/ReleaseNotes.rst test/clang-tidy/modernize-make-shared.cpp test/clang-tidy/modernize-make-unique.cpp Index: test/clang-tidy

Re: [PATCH] D23343: [clang-tidy] modernize-make-{smart_ptr} private ctor bugfix

Prazek updated this revision to Diff 67966. Prazek marked 6 inline comments as done. Prazek added a comment. - fixes https://reviews.llvm.org/D23343 Files: clang-tidy/modernize/MakeSmartPtrCheck.cpp docs/ReleaseNotes.rst test/clang-tidy/modernize-make-shared.cpp test/clang-tidy/moderniz

Re: [PATCH] D23434: Don't allow llvm-include-order to intermingle includes from different files.

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Zachary Turner wrote: > Sounds good. Just to be clear, you plan to delete the code from > clang-tidy, then take the code from clang-format and move it to clang-tidy, > and have clang-format call clang-tidy (or otherwise share the code somehow > so they both use t

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

The only thing that won't work is generating a compilation database on one machine and physically copying it to another machine, but I don't think we should worry about that. We can try to submit a request to CMake to get more info in the compilation database, but something like that is months out,

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

The json is generated by CMake, so I don't thinks we can do this without patching CMake, which is a non-starter. I don't think this will break mingw. Mingw is still Windows, and still uses Windows backslashes, quoting rules, and escaping rules. You might be thinking of cygwin, but in the case LLV

Re: [PATCH] D23476: Allow manual specification of the binary directory in check_clang_tidy.py

I was trying to rerun the lit commands manually to diagnose a failing test. This all works fine from lit, but if you want to run check_clang_tidy.py from the command line, this is convenient On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:27 AM Alexander Kornienko wrote: > alexfh added a comment. > > Why is this chan

Re: [PATCH] D22130: Link static PIE programs against rcrt0.o on OpenBSD

joerg added a comment. This is missing a test case. https://reviews.llvm.org/D22130 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Re: [PATCH] D23471: [Documentation] Improve checks groups descriptions in clang-tidy/index.rst

alexfh accepted this revision. alexfh added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Awesome! Looks good! Repository: rL LLVM https://reviews.llvm.org/D23471 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.

Re: [PATCH] D23455: [Tooling] Parse compilation database command lines properly on Windows

alexfh added inline comments. Comment at: lib/Tooling/JSONCompilationDatabase.cpp:119 @@ -115,1 +118,3 @@ StringRef EscapedCommandLine) { +#if defined(LLVM_ON_WIN32) + llvm::BumpPtrAllocator Alloc; As noted on D23409, this will likely break mingw compatibili

Re: [PATCH] D23476: Allow manual specification of the binary directory in check_clang_tidy.py

alexfh added a comment. Why is this change needed? What exactly doesn't work without it? I think, lit should take care of setting paths or changing directories appropriately. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23476 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@

Re: [PATCH] D23480: Add a test for clang-tidy using the clang cl driver

alexfh accepted this revision. alexfh added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. LG with two nits. > In order to get this to work, the positional arguments must use > --driver-mode=cl , and NOT clang-cl It's not that important for the fixed compilation database, as long

Re: [PATCH] D23485: [Branch 3.9] Remove any traces of partial constexpr lambda implementation (per Richard's request)

faisalv added a comment. Everything compiles - and all tests in clang/test pass. https://reviews.llvm.org/D23485 ___ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

[PATCH] D23485: [Branch 3.9] Remove any traces of partial constexpr lambda implementation (per Richard's request)

faisalv created this revision. faisalv added reviewers: hans, rsmith. faisalv added a subscriber: cfe-commits. Per Richard's request here: https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=28366#c10 This patch essentially reverses all the changes from the following commit: https://reviews.llvm.org/rL264513