NSProgrammer added a comment. In D17741#1413864 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D17741#1413864>, @kristina wrote:
> If the author is still missing at the end of next week, any objections to me > resubmitting a similar patch that just implements `__FILE_NAME__` or > `__BASE_NAME__` (Need a few more opinions here I guess, personally I think > `__FILE_NAME__` makes more sense)? > > I'll carve it out from my PP extension which simply looks for the last path > separator (depending on the OS) and only renders the filename after it (or > the whole path if there's no separator). No need for additional complications > like depths etc. Since this idea was shot down last time, is it possible to > get a few people to voice their opinion before I mark this as abandoned and > carve out and clean up this from my PP extension and add proper tests for it? > > Would be appreciated, as this sort of thing is very useful (IMO) so would > like to know if anyone is really against this proposal. Kristina, it looks like there is no push back and even plenty of support. How do you feel about going forward with submitting a patch that implements `__FILE_NAME__`? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D17741/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D17741 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
