mehdi_amini added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#532719, @o.gyorgy wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#530546, @mehdi_amini wrote:
>
> > > This looks like a fairly large tool. Should it get its own "subproject
> > > level" directory in the SVN instead of being nested wit
rizsotto.mailinglist added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#532718, @o.gyorgy wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#530293, @rizsotto.mailinglist wrote:
>
> > Gyorgy and the ericsson team, thanks for doing this. very good job! good
> > targeted functionality. i don't want to u
o.gyorgy added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#530546, @mehdi_amini wrote:
> > This looks like a fairly large tool. Should it get its own "subproject
> > level" directory in the SVN instead of being nested within clang?
>
>
> I'd add that the clang-tools-extra are more closely tied
o.gyorgy added a comment.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040#530293, @rizsotto.mailinglist wrote:
> Gyorgy and the ericsson team, thanks for doing this. very good job! good
> targeted functionality. i don't want to underestimate the complexity it
> requires, but to me this is a giant code. i do
mehdi_amini added a comment.
> This looks like a fairly large tool. Should it get its own "subproject level"
> directory in the SVN instead of being nested within clang?
I'd add that the clang-tools-extra are more closely tied to clang than what
this seems to be. Is there a strong rev-lock wit
mehdi_amini added a subscriber: mehdi_amini.
mehdi_amini added a comment.
This looks like a fairly large tool. Should it get its own "subproject level"
directory in the SVN instead of being nested within clang?
Comment at: tools/codechecker/README.md:50
@@ +49,3 @@
+# get sourc
artem.tamazov resigned from this revision.
artem.tamazov removed a reviewer: artem.tamazov.
artem.tamazov added a comment.
It seems that my name got into reviewers list by mistake.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D24040
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-com
rizsotto.mailinglist added a comment.
Gyorgy and the ericsson team, thanks for doing this. very good job! good
targeted functionality. i don't want to underestimate the complexity it
requires, but to me this is a giant code. i do miss the explanation of the
overall functional description what a
