sammccall added a comment. In D115425#3222782 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115425#3222782>, @njames93 wrote:
> For the website, we use tags to specify the clangd version that the option > was first supported in. > I'd suggest that we also add a `Version` field to the `Field` class. > This could also cause problem down the line if we ever wanted to remove a > config option. I definitely agree. FWIW, I didn't send this for review because I wasn't sure about the idea. Talked to @kadircet offline a bit, and I hope he doesn't mind me trying to summarize... - avoiding a couple of duplicated parts is definitely good - there's still config.h and the mapping thereto, which I don't think can be tablegenerated - tablegen syntax is really bad and also hard to browse with the code (I agree) - I don't see a better representation within the tablegen language (which is dumb, because this is a simple tree, but tablegen isn't good at trees) - We couldn't think of a representation that would be *nice* to edit/maintain that's easy to have in-tree (apart from the current C++ structs, but parsing C++ at build time is terrible) Actually we didn't discuss the option of using YAML itself as the format. The downsides I can think of (vs current C++): - no type system/checking/assistance for our weird DSL (tablegen a bit) - have to use strings as comments rather than using comments as comments (though at least YAML has nice strings for this purpose) - YAML is a pretty quirky language - the inherent level-confusion of using YAML to describe a YAML schema Maybe I'll mock this up, but I have some more pressing things to do so if anyone wants to shoot the idea first that'd be nice :-) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115425/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115425 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
