aaron.ballman added a comment. In D75332#1904317 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D75332#1904317>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D75332#1904264 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D75332#1904264>, @PaulkaToast > wrote: > > > In D75332#1903570 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D75332#1903570>, @MaskRay wrote: > > > > > > `RestrictSystemLibcHeadersCheck` > > > > > > As I commented previously, I think the checker name should be > > > generalized, as it does not need to be coupled with llvm-libc. Other > > > projects may have similar needs. For example, they don't want to > > > accidentally include a system zlib.h -> they may ship a bundled zlib > > > (say, in third_party/zlib/). > > > > > > Maybe `misc/` (or `portability/`) is more suitable? > > > > > > This is a simple check made precisely for llvm libc's use-case and doesn't > > require a human maintained list. As I mentioned, if a more > > general/configurable check is desired then porting out the > > fuchsia-restrict-system-includes would make more sense as it already > > implements white-lists and would handle the situation you described. > > > > > 1. D43778 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D43778> fuchsia-restrict-system-includes > 2. This patch llvmlibc-restrict-system-libc-headers > 3. The zlib use case I mentioned. > > I think we should consider generalizing the existing > fuchsia-restrict-system-includes (I did not know it). +@juliehockett > > Fuchsia and llvm-libc developers can use a config once the general checker > is ready. +1 Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D75332/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D75332 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
