Manikishan added a comment.

In D64695#1585835 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695#1585835>, @lebedev.ri wrote:

> In D64695#1585772 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695#1585772>, @Manikishan 
> wrote:
>
> > In D64695#1585754 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695#1585754>, @rdwampler 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I am not quite sure why this change is required to sort the headers for 
> > > NetBSD, you can set the priorities via `IncludeStyle.IncludeCategories`. 
> > > Is that not sufficient?
> >
> >
> > It can be done by setting priorities in IncludeCategories, but here we have 
> > nearly 40+ cases and categories to hardcode due to complex 
> > interdependencies between their headers. So, I have added this style 
> > reducing the cases using regex. And if this is fully parameterised any OS 
> > related project can add their own header priorities.
>
>
> Note that `IncludeCategories` is already a regex - 
> https://clang.llvm.org/docs/ClangFormatStyleOptions.html


Sorry,  my mistake I was but I added Regex for priorities while sorting and If 
I am not wrong I think IncludeCategories are used while Regrouping after 
sorting the Includes. In addition to that in my case I have to sort the 
includes In a particular order then grouping them in different
For example:

  #include <sys/param.h>                /* <sys/param.h> first, */
  #include <sys/types.h>                /*   <sys/types.h> next, */
  #include <sys/ioctl.h>                /*   and then the rest, */
  #include <uvm/*.h>
  #include <dev/*.h>
  
  #include <net/if.h>
  #include <net/if_dl.h>
  #include <net/route.h>
  #include <netinet/in.h>
  #include <protocols/rwhod.h>

As shown in the above example <uvm> should follow <sys> then <dev> but while 
regrouping they should be in the same group.


Repository:
  rC Clang

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D64695



_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to