[cfe-dev] C++11 migration tools

[Chris Lattner]

How is it conceptually different than the Objective-C modernizer?  Why not have both in one tool?

-Chris

On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:48 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:

> 
> On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote:
> 
>> FWIW, I'm a bit hesitant about lumping *all* migrations into a single tool... My preference is for a tool that is at least somewhat focused on a migration domain -- in this case, C++11.
> 
> I completely misread the post I replied to. Yes, I agree with Chandler: the tool should be a C++11 migration tool, so it has a specific, coherent purpose. It should have options for adopting specific C++11 features.
> 
> 	- Doug
> 
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Jun 29, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Sam Panzer <panzer at google.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > Thank you for giving a concrete proposal!
>> >
>> > One other feature to add would be a degree of confidence for any given change (Certain success, will probably work, risky), so that a command-line flag could control how aggressive any transformations are.
>> 
>> I don't think that we should admit any transformation unless we know that the resulting code type-checks. The tooling/refactoring stuff should provide that for us, and we'll need to be careful with some transformations (like the for-range loop transformation) that could break the semantics of the program if we're not careful. Migration tools aren't useful if they're going to break my code without telling me.
>> 
>> > To be more specific, one option is modeling the tool after diagnostics:
>> >  - Transformations are grouped in a new tool, source-migrate
>> >  - Each transformation should be named, so it can be turned on/off, such as -range-for-loop or -noconst-expr
>> >  - Each transformation should be grouped, so that all C++11 transformations could be enabled or disabled in one go, e.g. -Tnocxx11
>> >  - Each transformation should have some way to specify compiler requirements, such as requiring C++ mode.
>> >
>> > I think this is a good starting place for a code migration framework - I will try setting up a tool with proper command-line flags.
>> 
>> Yes, this seems completely reasonable.
>> 
>>        - Doug
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20120630/09897579/attachment.html>