[PATCH] Adds a CMake package configuration file for libclang
damien.buhl at lecbna.org
Thu Mar 14 07:59:00 PDT 2013
On 03/14/2013 03:45 PM, Brad King wrote:
> On 03/13/2013 05:33 PM, Damien Buhl wrote:
>> @Brad King : What do you think about LIBCLANG_LIBRARY_VERSION as a
>> concatenation of :
>> ? Isn't it a problem that patch and tweak version of the lib are the
>> major, minor of clang ?
> This is a decision for Clang/libclang folks to make, not me.
You are right, and it's good that you point it out, so that they feel
concerned, because in my mail I'm only adressing you on the question.
> The goal is to provide a version number that applications can use
> to ensure the libclang they find will meet their needs. The
> number is for the interface of libclang, so CINDEX_VERSION_*
> makes sense there IIRC.
> I'm not familiar enough with the relative versioning of Clang to
> libclang to make a specific recommendation on CLANG_VERSION_*
Yes I'm also a bit unsure of what they prefer and want, but I especially
asked you because perhaps you would have seen something strange in this
Thank you for all the advices until now. And thanks for CMake. :)
More information about the cfe-commits