erikjv closed this revision.
erikjv added a comment.
Committed as r318142.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
klimek accepted this revision.
klimek added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
LG.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-co
nik added a comment.
I don't get a review and I also don't know who should I add further to this
change. What now?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf
nik added a comment.
Ping...
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
nik added reviewers: ddunbar, krememek.
nik added a comment.
...added some more reviewers that I've found with git blame. Ping to the new
ones :)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.l
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554#903401, @nik wrote:
> Ilya, I hope it's OK if I take your description :)
Sure, no problem.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
h
nik added a comment.
Hmm, apparently "arc diff --update https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554"; did not
take the new commit message into account. Changed it manually with the web
interface.
Ilya, I hope it's OK if I take your description :)
> That said, I am not familiar with the code you're changin
nik updated this revision to Diff 119823.
nik added a comment.
Rebased and took over better wording/description from Ilya.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
Files:
tools/libclang/CIndex.cpp
tools/libclang/CIndexCodeCompletion.cpp
tools/libclang/Indexing.cpp
Index: tools/libclang/Indexing.
ilya-biryukov added a comment.
I think your change makes sense, but maybe asking for a better description.
It appears you:
- Enabled crash recovery for some libclang operations on a calling thread even
when `LIBCLANG_NOTHREAD` is specified. Previously it would only run under
crash recovery if
nik added a comment.
Ping 4
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
klimek added a reviewer: akyrtzi.
klimek added a comment.
Adding Argyrios, who might have insight on how this is used.
I think this had the wrong list of reviewers so far :(
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@li
yvvan added a comment.
ping 3
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
nik added a comment.
Ping 2
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
nik added a comment.
Ping
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
yvvan added a comment.
This actually fixes the ability to run safely without threads. This happens
because by default this solution leads to try/catch block instead of the direct
function call which is implemented in deleted if blocks.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D37554
___
15 matches
Mail list logo
