On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Aaron Ballman >> > <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Zachary Turner <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > - >> >> > std::unique_ptr<Command> visualstudio::Compile::GetCommand( >> >> > Compilation &C, const JobAction &JA, const InputInfo &Output, >> >> > const InputInfoList &Inputs, const ArgList &Args, >> >> > Index: lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp >> >> > =================================================================== >> >> > --- lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp >> >> > +++ lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp >> >> > @@ -77,61 +77,59 @@ >> >> > return getArch() == llvm::Triple::x86_64; >> >> > } >> >> > >> >> > +#ifdef USE_WIN32 >> >> > +static bool readFullStringValue(HKEY hkey, const char *valueName, >> >> > + std::string &value) { >> >> >> >> We should be preferring the W versions of these APIs instead of the A >> >> versions, especially since this is being used to pull out file paths. >> > >> > How does this work, since ultimately all of clang uses non-wide >> > character >> > strings anyway. I mean I know how to convert between the two, but I was >> > under the impression that everything was just already broken because >> > afaik >> > we don't ever use W functions anywhere else. >> >> My understanding is that we use the W versions of the APIs and >> immediately convert to UTF-8 to store internally. When we require >> interaction in the other direction, we convert back to UTF-16. At >> least, this is how we work with things like command line arguments and >> files. As an example, see Process::GetArgumentVector. > > > So llvm::sys::windows::UTF8ToUTF16 and its counterpart are not exposed in a > public header. Is there an accepted way to re-use them here, or do I need > to duplicate the code in clang?
There's not an accepted way currently, but duplication isn't the answer either. I think the registry code should be pulled down into an LLVM Support interface that's available on Windows (since we're already using USE_WIN32 within clang, I don't think the interface needs x-platform stubs), and the conversion routines hoisted to a place where they can be exposed for use within Support so that they can be used with the registry code. Registry use shouldn't be overly widespread, so I think the abstraction could be fairly simplistic. ~Aaron _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
