[cfe-dev] Using libClang for parsing Source and Comments

[Manuel Klimek via cfe-dev]

+benjamin who has added a new function that should also help on windows
(because it gets argv[0])

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 9:09 AM Jacob Carlborg via cfe-dev <
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On 2016-02-23 19:23, barbara via cfe-dev wrote:
> > We have not found a tutorial or any documentation addressing our
> > requirement to use libClang for parsing C++ source and full comments. We
> > are currently using libClang 3.6 for testing however moving to 3.7 is
> > possible although we would rather wait for 3.8.
> >
> > At the present time we have code to walk the AST and obtain cursors and
> > tokens for a sample C++ header. The following are the initial problems
> > we have encountered.
> >
> > 1)    Locate C++ standard headers
> >
> > On Debian we did not have to pass any parameters to libClang for it to
> > locate the C++ standard header files.
> >
> > On Windows, I had to pass six include lines which referenced GCC std
> > header files. This works but it will be cumbersome for our users. We
> > talked with a few people at the last llvm meeting  it was mentioned
> > there might be some enhancements for detecting the system headers.
> >
> > Do anyone have ideas or suggestion about this?
>
> If your tool can detect the headers you can always pass in additional
> flags to the clang_parseTranslationUnit2 function. You could also ship
> the headers with your tool to avoid the users having to install the
> developer tools for the platform. It's even possible to embed headers
> the executable itself. I'm doing that with some of the internal Clang
> headers, see [2][3].
>
> > 2)    We need to retrieve all the comments and using "cursors" this has
> > not worked.  We can easily generate a list of the tokens and walking
> > these appear to show the comments, however this feels very awkward and
> > slow.  We understand the basic idea of cursors and tokens. We are not
> > sure about the pros and cons of each approach.
>
> There's a complete module for comment introspection [1]. I have not
> tried it myself yet but it looks quite extensive.
>
> > 3)  Is the -Wdocumentation flag passed to clang when building. Or is
> > this flag supposed to be passed to libClang?  Will this provide us with
> > more of the user comments?  It appeared to to have no effect.
>
> If the comment introspection API does not provide the data you need you
> could try the CXTranslationUnit_DetailedPreprocessingRecord option for
> the clang_parseTranslationUnit2 function.
>
> [1] http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/group__CINDEX__COMMENT.html
> [2]
>
> http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Builtin-headers-td4049705.html#message4049716
> [3]
>
> http://clang-developers.42468.n3.nabble.com/Builtin-headers-td4049705.html#message4049772
>
> --
> /Jacob Carlborg
>
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20160224/37adca6c/attachment.html>