ilya-biryukov added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:429
+ const auto &CommandLine = Inputs.CompileCommand.CommandLine;
+ for (size_t I = 0, E = CommandLine.size(); I != E; I++) {
+ // According to https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangPlugins.html
----------------
ioeric wrote:
> ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > ilya-biryukov wrote:
> > > ioeric wrote:
> > > > This doesn't seem to be clangd specific; clang-tidy seems to have the
> > > > same issue. Could we share the filtering logic (e.g. in
> > > > lib/Tooling/ArgumentsAdjusters.cpp)?
> > > We need a comment mentioning that we are filtering out the plugin options
> > > and why we're doing that here
> > +1 to the suggestion.
> > WDYT about landing it into clangd as a quick workaround and moving into
> > tooling later?
> > The reason I think it might be better is because that would unblock usage
> > of clangd in Chromium.
> > WDYT about landing it into clangd as a quick workaround and moving into
> > tooling later?
> > The reason I think it might be better is because that would unblock usage
> > of clangd in Chromium.
> I don't see why it would take much more effort to move the shared logic into
> tooling now?
My approximation would be half an hour to finish this and land in clangd and
2-3 hours to land this in tooling, update clangd, clang-tidy, etc.
Not a big difference, though, up to Kadir to actually quantify how hard he
thinks this would be.
Repository:
rCTE Clang Tools Extra
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56841/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D56841
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
