On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 03:43:40PM +0300, Yuriy Skalko wrote: > > Are we trying to make it > > > > - "semantically correct", by which I mean removing includes unrelated to > > the content of the processed file (i.e. forgotten header which is no > > more used becase the code using it is gone). > > Having "unnecessary" include whose content is used (but already included > > recursively via another include) is actually proper. > > > > - just trying to speedup things, so any possible include gone is good. > > > > I don't have strong opinions about the direction, but I think we should > > first > > agree > > what we are trying to achieve here. > > > > Pavel > > My main point for preparing the patch was achieving the first goal -- > semantic correctness.
That's fine with me. > Every source file should include only headers with declarations it is > using. Agreed. Unfortunately I suspect that we can achive this only by manually going through the suspects proposed by some tools instead of just taking their results. > And not to depend on transitive (or recursive as you called) > includes since they are fragile and not reliable. I do not think this is good idea, our include section would explode if we really tried to fix all these Pavel -- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
