On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jul 26, 2012, at 10:23 , David Blaikie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > While reading the "How To Setup Clang Tooling for LLVM" documentation > > ( http://clang.llvm.org/docs/HowToSetupToolingForLLVM.html ) I ran > > into a snag where the document implied that clang-check would be > > installed alongside clang. This is currently not the case - we don't > > install clang-check, at least not in the cmake build (&, given the > > presence of "NO_INSTALL = 1" in the Makefile, I assume we don't in the > > make build either). > > > > Should we? It seems like a natural enough thing to install, though I > > realize the specifics of which tools will be developed where and how > > they'll be installed is still in flux, so I figured I'd start a thread > > to discuss this rather than just committing it. > > > > [as a side note: why do we install diagtool (perhaps there's some use > > for it other than the internal diagnostic flag regression testing?) > > and c-index-test (by name I would've thought that was just an internal > > test binary)] > > "diagtool tree" and "diagtool show-enabled" are at least theoretically > useful externally, though we don't document them anywhere. I kind of > figured things in tools/ are potentially useful outside of clang and could > be installed, and things in utils/ were just for internal use. I don't > think that was ever formally established, though. > > > Is not diagtool used by the test Ted introduced to make sure clang does not regress in its list of warnings without flags ? -- Matthieu
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
