Couldn't LLVM expose a registry interface on Windows and then the front-end could conditionally include this header on Windows? Other users of LLVM might wish to use the registry too.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Reid Kleckner <[email protected]> wrote: > IMO it's OK to use windows.h directly in this case. There's no sensible > cross-platform interface to the registry that we could add to lib/Support. > The registry only exists on Windows. > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Aaron Ballman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Alp Toker <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On 24/06/2014 19:53, Aaron Ballman wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Logan Chien < >> [email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Author: logan >> >>> Date: Tue Jun 24 11:18:10 2014 >> >>> New Revision: 211604 >> >>> >> >>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=211604&view=rev >> >>> Log: >> >>> Use lowercase windows.h for mingw cross compilation. >> >>> >> >>> Modified: >> >>> cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp >> >>> >> >>> Modified: cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp >> >>> URL: >> >>> >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp?rev=211604&r1=211603&r2=211604&view=diff >> >>> >> >>> >> ============================================================================== >> >>> --- cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp (original) >> >>> +++ cfe/trunk/lib/Driver/WindowsToolChain.cpp Tue Jun 24 11:18:10 2014 >> >>> @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ >> >>> #define WIN32_LEAN_AND_MEAN >> >>> #define NOGDI >> >>> #define NOMINMAX >> >>> - #include <Windows.h> >> >>> + #include <windows.h> >> >>> #endif >> >> >> >> Why is windows.h being included here instead of WindowsSupport.h? >> > >> > >> > WindowsSupport.h is internal to LLVM at the moment. We probably don't >> need >> > it for the limited uses of windows.h in the frontend. >> >> That's reasonably fair, but I think getting any instances of Windows.h >> out of the frontend would be a very good thing. Obviously, that has no >> bearing on this patch. :-) >> >> ~Aaron >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-commits mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits >> > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
