[cfe-dev] clangd/libclang: how to emulate other compilers?

[Doug Schaefer via cfe-dev]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Milian Wolff [mailto:mail at milianw.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:20 PM
> To: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org; Doug Schaefer <dschaefer at blackberry.com>
> Subject: Re: [cfe-dev] clangd/libclang: how to emulate other compilers?
> 
> On Dienstag, 17. April 2018 22:35:00 CEST Doug Schaefer via cfe-dev wrote:
> > Eclipse CDT does something similar. For each unique collection of
> > compiler command line arguments (i.e. for files that build with the
> > same options) we add -E -P -v -dD and call the real compiler to get
> > the list of all include paths and symbols used for a given parse,
> > including both user and built-in ones. Works with both clang and gcc.
> >
> > For compiler specifics, we cheat and add macros that work us through
> > the parse errors. You likely lose info but at least it rounds up to a
> > pretty good parse.
> 
> Ah, so you also have something like this [1] which I forgot to reference in my
> initial email:
> 
> https://github.com/KDE/kdevelop/blob/master/plugins/clang/duchain/gcc_com
> pat.h
> 
> If so, can you point me to your version of that file? If you are also using this
> approach, and it works for you, then I guess we should share resources and both
> work on a common file.

Now putting them in a include file would have been smart. Unfortunately, we have them hardcoded in the CDT source and add them directly to scanner info.

If you have the CDT source checked out it's all handled in classes that implement IScannerExtensionConfiguration.

> 
> Out of interest: Have you ever tried to parse old clang headers with a CDT built
> against a newer clang?

CDT has it's own parsers. That's why we're looking at clangd to replace all that and leverage clang's parser. And it lets us future proof thanks to the LSP.
 
> > I'm at the very beginning of trying to figure out how we'd do
> > something similar with clangd. This feature will be a must for users
> > with embedded systems toolchains which are mainly based on gcc.
> >
> > Doug.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cfe-dev [mailto:cfe-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of
> > Milian Wolff via cfe-dev Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 4:03 PM
> > To: Clang Dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> > Subject: [cfe-dev] clangd/libclang: how to emulate other compilers?
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > how does clangd or other users of the libclang handle situations where
> > you want to parse code that is dependent on a certain other compiler
> > or compiler environment? The most common scenario being embedded
> > projects that rely on the compiler-builtin defines and include paths
> > to find the sysroot include paths and such.
> >
> > For KDevelop, which is using libclang, we have tried to build a sort
> > of emulation layer that originally yielded good results. The approach
> > is as
> > followed:
> >
> > 1) We use the actual compiler that is used to compile a given project, e.g.
> > gcc, arm-none-eabi-gcc, ...
> >
> > 2) We take this compiler and query it for its builtin defines:
> > /usr/bin/gcc -xc++ -std=c++11 -dM -E - < /dev/null
> >
> > 3) And also query the include paths:
> > /usr/bin/gcc -xc++ -std=c++11 -v -E - < /dev/null
> >
> > 4) Then for the libclang calls to clang_parseTranslationUnit2 we pass
> > `- nostdinc -nostdinc++` followed by the defines and includes we got
> > from 2) and 3).
> >
> > Now, for simply things this actually worked quite well. But once you
> > include a file that heavily relies on the compiler, such as all the
> > SIMD intrinsic headers, you are easily drowning in parse errors. And
> > once you have too many parse errors, clang will just give up. We have
> > tried to workaround this via compatibility headers such as [1], but it keeps
> breaking.
> >
> > More recently, we now also got bug reports where the user system has
> > clang3 and they use that to to compile the code, but then download a
> > KDevelop AppImage built against libclang v5 (e.g. via AppImage). Once
> > again this easily yields tons of parse errors when encountering system
> > headers that are using intrinsics specific to clang v3.
> >
> > I am now thinking about removing the emulation layer described above.
> > But then it will be essentially impossible to work on a lot of
> > embedded projects which rely on the cross compiler defines and include
> paths...
> >
> > So, once again - how do other users of libclang handle this scenario?
> > What is the plan for clangd in this regard?
> >
> > Thanks
> > --
> > Milian Wolff
> > mail at milianw.de
> > http://milianw.de
> > _______________________________________________
> > cfe-dev mailing list
> > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> 
> 
> --
> Milian Wolff
> mail at milianw.de
> http://milianw.de