abhina.sreeskantharajan added a comment. In D99363#2653201 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D99363#2653201>, @aganea wrote:
> I'm just wondering if D96363 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96363> and all > attached subsequent patches shouldn't be reverted for now. This is a quite > trivial case uncovered by tests. On re-land, I would then add a test > validating the issue on Windows: > > $ cat -A rewrite-includes-clang-cl.cpp > // REQUIRES: system-windows^M$ > // RUN: %clang_cl /E -Xclang -frewrite-includes %s | %clang_cl /c /Tp -^M$ > ^M$ > int foo();^M$ > int bar();^M$ > #define HELLO \^M$ > foo(); \^M$ > bar();^M$ > ^M$ > int main() {^M$ > HELLO^M$ > return 0;^M$ > }^M$ There were a lot of similar patches so reverting all of them might be more work than isolating the change that caused it and reverting that. It seems that the patch you initially commented on did not contain the problematic change since reverting the change doesn't fix your issue. I created the following patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D99426 based on @rnk suggestion. I created a new flag for OF_TextWithCRLF on Windows and made sure my most recent text changes use the OF_Text flag while all other uses were changed to OF_TextWithCRLF. This should solve any CRLF issues that were introduced recently by my patches. If you have time, would you be able to test if that patch fixes your issue? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D99363/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D99363 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
