[cfe-dev] [PATCH] Fix clang test failures on MIPS

[Manuel Klimek]

On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Matthieu Monrocq
<matthieu.monrocq at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Simon Atanasyan <satanasyan at mips.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
>> >> I haven't put too much thought into the interface yet, but I'd imagine
>> >> something along the lines of
>> >> class ArgumentAdjuster {
>> >> public:
>> >>  vector<std::string> Adjust(const vector<std::string> &Arguments) = 0;
>> >> };
>> >>
>> >> class ClangSyntaxOnlyAdjuster : public ArgumentAdjuster { ... };
>> >>
>> >> Then, for people who have command lines that are for gcc for some
>> >> reasons:
>> >> class GccToClangAdjuster : public ArgumentAdjuster { ... };
>> >>
>> >> Then we can install a ClangSyntaxOnlyAdjuster per default and add a
>> >> method to ClangTool:
>> >> void setArgumentAdjuster(ArgumentAdjuster *Adjuster);
>> >>
>> >> I think the argument adjusting is orthogonal to the tool, so I'd
>> >> rather avoid inheritance on the ClangTool level.
>> >
>> > Now I see your point and like this approach. I will implement and send
>> > a patch for review.
>>
>> Thx! Looking forward to it :)
>>
>
> It always bothered me a bit, so since this is going to be adjusted...
>
> Is there a fundamental reason to reason in terms of `string` here ?
>
> Or more accurately, I understand that parsing the command line requires
> strings in input, but why should it produce strings in output, instead of a
> more canonical form ?

Do you have a proposal what you mean with a 'more canonical form' here?

Cheers,
/Manuel