[cfe-commits] [patch] installing clang-check as part of clang

[Chandler Carruth]

LGTM too btw. =] Thanks for doing this.


On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 31, 2012, at 12:42 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jul 31, 2012, at 11:20 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 10:23 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> While reading the "How To Setup Clang Tooling for LLVM" documentation
> >>>>> ( http://clang.llvm.org/docs/HowToSetupToolingForLLVM.html ) I ran
> >>>>> into a snag where the document implied that clang-check would be
> >>>>> installed alongside clang. This is currently not the case - we don't
> >>>>> install clang-check, at least not in the cmake build (&, given the
> >>>>> presence of "NO_INSTALL = 1" in the Makefile, I assume we don't in
> the
> >>>>> make build either).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Should we? It seems like a natural enough thing to install, though I
> >>>>> realize the specifics of which tools will be developed where and how
> >>>>> they'll be installed is still in flux, so I figured I'd start a
> thread
> >>>>> to discuss this rather than just committing it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [as a side note: why do we install diagtool (perhaps there's some use
> >>>>> for it other than the internal diagnostic flag regression testing?)
> >>>>> and c-index-test (by name I would've thought that was just an
> internal
> >>>>> test binary)]
> >>>>> <clang_check_install.diff>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It depends on whether we think the installation is for end-users of
> Clang or for developers who want to work on Clang or Clang-based tools. I
> tend to think that we should favor for former, and only install the base
> compiler (clang, clang++, support headers and support libraries). If we
> want to have a "developer mode" that installs everything else, that's fine.
> >>>
> >>> Especially with the vim integration, the use case of clang-check I see
> >>> is much more for clang-users (-> compiling their random open source
> >>> project with clang) than for clang devs. Of course we're not yet at
> >>> the integration level we want to be at for editors; which I can see as
> >>> an objection to default-installing it in its current state.
> >>
> >>
> >> That's a good point; clang-check is (will be) important for users.
> >>
> >> diagtool, though, isn't something users should ever need. If a user
> needs to explore warnings and flags, they should be able to look at some
> documentation. Installing diagtool doesn't get us out of writing
> documentation :)
> >
> > So - stop installing diagtool and c-index-test and start installing
> clang-check?
>
> WFM.
>
>         - Doug
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120731/3873c6ba/attachment.html>