The Clang module libraries are all called libClang[A-Z][a-zA-Z]+.{a,so}, so
libclangcpp doesn't conflict with that, but I wonder if a dash would set it
apart even more clearly: libclang-cpp.
Or something like clang-all to show that it houses all clang modules?
Bikesheds are the best sheds.
- Kim
libclangcpp ?
I think it is a pretty common pattern.
On debian, apt-cache search 'lib.*cpp' returns a bunch of libraries
(libhdf5-cpp, libroscpp2d, libjsonrpccpp-dev, libmysqlcppconn7v5,
libsvncpp3, libtercpp0v5, libyaml-cpp-dev, etc)
S
Le 02/07/2019 à 01:22, Chris Bieneman a écrit :
The
The question is, what *should* it be called.
While yes, the 's' in 'so' is shared, the "dylib" and "dll" extensions on
Darwin and Windows have the same meaning too. The problem is libclang.so is
already taken.
I'm not attached to the name in any way, so I'm open to suggestions.
We do have docu
I don't want building libclang_shared to be disabled when
`BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=On`. libclang_shared fulfills a completely different purpose
from `BUILD_SHARED_LIBS`.
-Chris
> On May 21, 2019, at 12:20 PM, Ethan Sommer via Phabricator
> wrote:
>
> E5ten added a comment.
>
> @beanz Wouldn't fix
