================ @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ +//===---------------- ModuleDependencyScanner.cpp ----------------*- C++-*-===// +// +// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions. +// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information. +// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception +// +//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// + +#include "ModuleDependencyScanner.h" + +namespace clang { +namespace clangd { + +std::optional<ModuleDependencyScanner::ModuleDependencyInfo> +ModuleDependencyScanner::scan(PathRef FilePath) { + std::optional<tooling::CompileCommand> Cmd = CDB.getCompileCommand(FilePath); + + if (!Cmd) + return std::nullopt; + + using namespace clang::tooling::dependencies; + + llvm::SmallString<128> FilePathDir(FilePath); + llvm::sys::path::remove_filename(FilePathDir); + DependencyScanningTool ScanningTool(Service, TFS.view(FilePathDir)); ---------------- sam-mccall wrote:
is ScanningTool designed for one instance to be reused across invocations of `getP1689ModuleDependencyFile`, and share caches? Should we try to do that here, since almost all the time we're calling scan() in a sequential loop? I get that ultimately we want to have a shared cache across all module scanning happening in the project and this may conflict a little, this just seems like really low-hanging fruit. Up to you though. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/66462 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
