rsmith added a comment.
This feature seems reasonable to me.
================
Comment at: lib/Frontend/DependencyFile.cpp:206-223
class DFGMMCallback : public ModuleMapCallbacks {
DFGImpl &Parent;
public:
DFGMMCallback(DFGImpl &Parent) : Parent(Parent) {}
void moduleMapFileRead(SourceLocation Loc, const FileEntry &Entry,
bool IsSystem) override {
+ if (Parent.skipUnusedModuleMaps())
----------------
I wonder whether it'd be clearer to have two different callbacks for the two
behaviors here, rather than one callback that essentially does one of two
completely different things.
================
Comment at: lib/Lex/ModuleMap.cpp:728-735
+ // Notify callbacks that we found a module map for the module.
+ if (!M->DefinitionLoc.isInvalid())
+ for (const auto &Cb : Callbacks)
+ Cb->moduleMapFoundForModule(
+ *getContainingModuleMapFile(M), M,
+ SourceMgr.getFileCharacteristic(M->DefinitionLoc) ==
+ SrcMgr::C_System_ModuleMap);
----------------
Does the right thing happen when we load module map information from a PCM file?
I'm also worried that this will fire at the wrong times (eg, more than once per
module, or not at all if the module is only ever found by header lookup).
Perhaps we should instead trigger the callback when the module is first
imported?
Repository:
rC Clang
https://reviews.llvm.org/D45012
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
