VerifyDiagnosticConsumer and ModuleMapParser

[Jordan Rose]

Is it really worth putting effort into -verify for this? I'd be okay with just using FileCheck:

// CHECK: {{Inputs[/\\]declare-use[/\\]module.map}}:30:10: note: header file...

Jordan


> On Nov 3, 2014, at 2:10 , Vassil Vassilev <vvasilev at cern.ch> wrote:
> 
> Hi guys,
>  I am working on http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=20507 Now the diagnostic gets issued for:
>    Clang :: Modules/declare-use1.cpp
>    Clang :: Modules/declare-use2.cpp
>    Clang :: Modules/declare-use3.cpp
>    Clang :: Modules/strict-decluse.cpp
> 
> It says smth like: Modules/Inputs/declare-use/module.map:30:10: note: Header file 'unavailable.h' not present in module 'XF'
> 
> I'd like to add an expected diag to the modulemap file. Eg:
> module XF {
>  ...
>  header "unavailable.h" // expected-note {{...}}
>  ...
> }
> 
> Is that the right way to go?
> 
> If yes, VerifyDiagnosticConsumer requires some callbacks (such as HandleComment) which come from the Preprocessor. In the ModuleMapParser we use raw lexing (without PP at all) and I was wondering what would be the right way to go, in order to make the -verify flag work inside the module maps. One solution that I see is to pass the comment handlers from the PP to the ModuleMapParser, however IMO this would break the encapsulation. Do you have better ideas?
> 
> Many thanks,
> Vassil
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-commits mailing list
> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits