alexfh added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46602#1092902, @lebedev.ri wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D46602#1092890, @alexfh wrote: > > > Roman, it looks to me that a simpler storage scheme would be sufficient. > > For example, YYYYMMDDhhmmss-InputFileName.cpp.csv. > > Main things are: > > > > 1. include a timestamp, so there's no need to overwrite old results, > > > Of the input source file? No, current timestamp, when each profile gets dumped. >> 2. include just the name of the file without any parent directories, > > That won't work, there are duplicate filenames even in LLVM. That's why I suggested to include a timestamp. Each result file will get a unique timestamp as a part of its name (unless the resolution of the timestamp is too coarse - compared to clang-tidy run time - to allow collisions). > $ find -iname Path.cpp > ./lib/Support/Path.cpp > ./unittests/Support/Path.cpp > > > 3. put all outputs into the same directory. This way we wouldn't have to > create a directory structure and think about stripping a certain prefix (btw, > utilities like patch just specify the number of path components to remove > from the start, not the actual substring). WDYT? > > I'm not particularly looking forward to having being forced to have n > thousands of reports in a single directory :) What kind of problems do you expect to have with this? Are you going to look at the result files manually or use a script to aggregate them? Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D46602 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
