A patch to move codegen includes into public include

[Reid Kleckner]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> I think this hurts Clang layering and maintainability. At the moment,
> *within Clang*, it's very useful to have most of the CodeGen headers in
> lib/CodeGen rather than within include/clang/CodeGen, since that makes
> obvious and enforces the layering between CodeGen's private headers and the
> rest of Clang.
>
> => I'm opposed to this change. The CodeGen API is even more implementation
> details than the AST and Sema API. If you want to include clang's internal
> implementation details, go ahead, but I don't think we should break our own
> layering to support this.
>

Do we (or did we) have actual layering problems where parts of clang think
they can call into CodeGen? Today the only include into clang/Codegen comes
from FrontendTool.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140825/6ea22e01/attachment.html>