On 25/02/15 21:07, Sterling Augustine wrote:
Circling back to this incremental parsing.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:28 AM, Vassil Vassilev <[email protected]> wrote:
The reason we went for IncrementalProcessing is that it does more than just
parsing, it allows clang to be able to continue working even upon seeing an
EOF token.
Right.
Could you also add a test case maybe closer to your planned use-case?
It's actually somewhat difficult because it requires a lot of
infrastructure to get there.
IMO we should invest some effort to test the feature because it becomes
of wider use.
The short version is that ParseAST doesn't allow me to modify the
preprocessor before it starts parsing.
But from a functionality perspective, nothing should be different than
it is today. Whatever test cases exist should cover the functionality
present.
Sounds reasonable.
Vassil
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Axel Naumann <[email protected]> wrote:
Wow, that's so much nicer!
Thanks!
OK to check in?
Sterling
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
