[PATCH] Allow specifying a custom PathDiagnosticConsumer for use with the static analyzer.

[Manuel Klimek]

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Could you mark it 'accepted' in Phabricator?
>>>> http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D2556
>>>>
>>>
>>> There is no need for anybody to mark anything in phab :) LG on the
>>> mailing list is enough...
>>>
>>
>> Sure there's no need. I just use Phab's arcanist tool, which needs less
>> explanations when committing an accepted patch. So it's better when the
>> status is updated in Phab, if it doesn't inconvenience the reviewer.
>>
>
> For exactly that reason we got "self accept" implemented upstream, so if
> you get an LG on the mailing list, you can just self-accept and submit via
> arc...
>

Oh, or was that "self close"? In that case, we can get self accept
implemented, too :)


>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 30, 2014, at 16:34 , Alexander Kornienko <alexfh at google.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  But maybe I'm just worried about people doing this in general, and
>>>>>> shouldn't worry about the specific case of clang-tidy, which will probably
>>>>>> get these answers right and be able to evolve with the analyzer core.
>>>>>> Still, once Pandora's Box is opened, it can't easily be closed again, and
>>>>>> we'd really like external consumers of path diagnostics to build tools that
>>>>>> consume a standard output format rather than needing a custom build of
>>>>>> Clang to do it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The difference between a tool statically linked with clang and a
>>>>> standalone tool consuming analyzer's output in some format is huge, and I
>>>>> don't think sane people would choose the former, if they only need to
>>>>> consumer analyzer's output in some form.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All right, you've convinced me. I'll take a look at the names patch,
>>>>> but this one is fine. Let's get more analyzer users! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Jordan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140203/9be634f1/attachment.html>