sammccall accepted this revision.
sammccall added a comment.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
As discussed, we should probably bundle together some related options into
structs to make plumbing easier. Not a blocker here though.
If these options are pure-data, I think it's OK if some layers end up with
access to other layers' options.
================
Comment at: clangd/ClangdUnit.cpp:238
if (Preamble) {
- Preamble->AddImplicitPreamble(*CI, Buffer.get());
+ Preamble->AddImplicitPreamble(*CI, /*ref*/ VFS, Buffer.get());
} else {
----------------
ref is still here :-)
================
Comment at: clangd/tool/ClangdMain.cpp:48
+static llvm::cl::opt<bool> StorePreamblesInMemory(
+ "in-memory-pchs",
----------------
Couple of questions about the flag syntax:
- I wonder about the granularity - if we had another temp storage (indexes?),
would we want another flag or something shared like `-in-memory-storage`
- Having this as a bool seems confusing compared to
`-pch-storage={memory/disk}`. (We could also overload such a flag to allow
setting the location, but nobody's asked for that yet)
https://reviews.llvm.org/D39843
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
