kimgr added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/tools/CMakeLists.txt:35
+# if include-what-you-use is cloned for building in-tree, add it here.
+if (EXISTS "${CMAKE_CURRENT_SOURCE_DIR}/include-what-you-use")
+ add_clang_subdirectory(include-what-you-use)
----------------
beanz wrote:
> rnk wrote:
> > Maybe we should do `llvm_add_implicit_projects(CLANG)` here instead?
> >
> > Or do we not want clang/tools to be a project extension point? Would IWYU
> > build fine if we added it to llvm/projects or llvm/tools? Maybe we should
> > just recommend that.
> Either `llvm_add_implicit_projects(CLANG)` or
> `add_llvm_external_project(include-what-you-use include-what-you-use)`.
>
> The former case would make this a generic extension point, which I think is
> good, the later would add just this project without needing to wrap it in an
> `if`.
>
> I would prefer going the implicit route because I actually have a distaste
> for having code living in-tree that is specifically for supporting
> out-of-tree code.
> Would IWYU build fine if we added it to llvm/projects or llvm/tools? Maybe we
> should just recommend that.
IWYU has all dependencies explicitly listed to support out-of-tree builds too,
so I think it could be made to work with some include/lib path setup. But it
would feel weird layering-wise, since it depends so heavily on clang.
As for `llvm_add_implicit_projects` vs `add_llvm_external_project`, I'm
guessing it doesn't make a difference for IWYU's CMake system? Mild preference
for `llvm_add_implicit_projects` to keep mention of `include-what-you-use` out
of Clang until we can form a coherent story about upstreaming.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D31696
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
