jansvoboda11 wrote:
> But the list of tokens depends on things like what features are enabled,
> right? e.g., `-fchar8_t` introduces a new keyword, while `_Atomic` isn't a
> keyword in OpenCL, and `bool` is only a keyword in C23 and later but is
> always a keyword in C++, etc. Ah, but in terms
AaronBallman wrote:
> > > You can certainly construct cases where the different lexing rules in
> > > different language modes allow you to detect which language you're in
> > > from within the preprocessor ([1](https://eel.is/c++draft/diff.cpp11.lex)
> > > [2](https://eel.is/c++draft/diff.cpp
jansvoboda11 wrote:
> > You can certainly construct cases where the different lexing rules in
> > different language modes allow you to detect which language you're in from
> > within the preprocessor ([1](https://eel.is/c++draft/diff.cpp11.lex)
> > [2](https://eel.is/c++draft/diff.cpp14.lex#2
AaronBallman wrote:
> > > > I guess the general question is - is it acceptable to have the Scanner
> > > > operating in a language standard different than the passed in language
> > > > mode and different than the compiler language standard?
> > >
> > >
> > > I think that is acceptable. It is
AaronBallman wrote:
> > > I guess the general question is - is it acceptable to have the Scanner
> > > operating in a language standard different than the passed in language
> > > mode and different than the compiler language standard?
> >
> >
> > I think that is acceptable. It is kinda hacky
zygoloid wrote:
> > I guess the general question is - is it acceptable to have the Scanner
> > operating in a language standard different than the passed in language mode
> > and different than the compiler language standard?
>
> I think that is acceptable. It is kinda hacky, but the lexer and
nishithshah2211 wrote:
Here is the revert PR: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94488
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-co
jansvoboda11 wrote:
> > You can have a project that has both C and C++ implementation files that
> > end up including the same header files from the C standard library. One can
> > be compiled under C11 (without separator support), the other under C++14
> > (with separator support).
>
> Thank
nishithshah2211 wrote:
> You can have a project that has both C and C++ implementation files that end
> up including the same header files from the C standard library. One can be
> compiled under C11 (without separator support), the other under C++14 (with
> separator support).
Thanks. I had
jansvoboda11 wrote:
> Thanks for the comments @jansvoboda11 . I am new to all these different
> moving parts and want to understand better. I have a few questions.
>
> > If you concurrently scan the same file under two language standards with
> > the same scanning service, it becomes non-deter
nishithshah2211 wrote:
Thanks for the comments @jansvoboda11 . I am new to all these different moving
parts and want to understand better. I have a few questions.
> If you concurrently scan the same file under two language standards with the
> same scanning service, it becomes non-deterministi
jansvoboda11 wrote:
I don't think this is correct. If you concurrently scan the same file under two
language standards with the same scanning service, it becomes non-deterministic
which one gets cached in the filesystem cache. For subsequent FS queries the
cache might return wrong results, ign
github-actions[bot] wrote:
@nishithshah2211 Congratulations on having your first Pull Request (PR) merged
into the LLVM Project!
Your changes will be combined with recent changes from other authors, then
tested
by our [build bots](https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/). If there is a problem with
https://github.com/cor3ntin closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
nishithshah2211 wrote:
Thanks for the pointers. What would be the process to merge this in?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-comm
https://github.com/cor3ntin approved this pull request.
I think this makes sense.
Thanks a lot for the fix
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/li
nishithshah2211 wrote:
Yes, sorry I missed committing that change. Let me know if there is a better
way to test out the changes or add any additional changes.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lis
https://github.com/nishithshah2211 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
>From 46a25038abbcf5ab9eebded6813b4bbb71a44925 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nishith Shah
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 12:34:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Pass LangOpts from CompilerInstance to
DependencyScanning
cor3ntin wrote:
Can you add a test for https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/88896 ?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commi
nishithshah2211 wrote:
@cor3ntin Thanks for reviewing. I updated the PR to get the tests/build
passing. Please take a look when you get a chance.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
h
https://github.com/nishithshah2211 updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
>From ae79ebec844a6a308bb370184eab892bd74e8fa1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nishith Shah
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 12:34:52 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Pass LangOpts from CompilerInstance to
DependencyScanning
cor3ntin wrote:
Thanks for working on that. Your change is pretty much what i expected yes,
it's great!
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
nishithshah2211 wrote:
@cor3ntin @Sirraide I put up a draft PR to get some feedback and see if the
changes here make sense or not.
Also tagging @pogo59 since I received good feedback/pointers here:
https://discourse.llvm.org/t/looking-for-help-with-accessing-langopts-from-the-actual-compiler-i
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang
Author: Nishith Kumar M Shah (nishithshah2211)
Changes
This commit fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/88896 by passing
LangOpts from the CompilerInstance to
DependencyScanningWorker so that the original LangOpts are preserved/respec
github-actions[bot] wrote:
Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!
This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be
notified.
If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this
page.
If this is not working for you, it
https://github.com/nishithshah2211 created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/93753
This commit fixes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/88896 by passing
LangOpts from the CompilerInstance to
DependencyScanningWorker so that the original LangOpts are preserved/respected.
This ma
26 matches
Mail list logo
