[cfe-commits] Fix search path for clang on latest DragonFly releases [revised patches]

[John Marino]

On 12/20/2012 18:40, Rafael Espíndola wrote:
>> On one hand, I definitely appreciate the fact that you are the *ONLY* person
>> that's shown interest in this, but this is getting frustrating for me.  If I
>> jump through this latest hoop, can we *please* fast-track this to get
>> committed?
>
> I don't think we have a fast-track. Patches should do one thing and be
> tested. This is specially true for areas almost no one in the project
> is familiar with (like what DragonFly looks like).

That was a euphemism for asking for this patch to be actively worked 
rather than push it off again.  Obviously people aren't familiar with 
DragonFly because a test already existed and it obviously isn't getting run.

>
> And no, they should not have an uninitiated variable use :-)

As I understood it, both approaches are equivalent and this is simply a 
preference thing.  The point of what I did was to initialize the 
variable.  Is that not what the code does?  I think I even got that from 
other clang code.

I would have had no problem with you just changing it after the fact if 
they are indeed equivalent.  I wouldn't have thought that would have 
been enough to reject the patch.

Clang does self-host with this patch, which it did not do before.


By the way, the updated test assumes all changes are added.  I don't 
intend to patch dragonfly.c for each change.