vbvictor wrote: > @vbvictor — could you suggest an alternative reviewer for this change?
I don't know anyone that can review this code apart from already added people. FYI, there is lack of review capacity in clangd https://discourse.llvm.org/t/help-needed-with-clangd-maintenance/89820. And from what I've seen non-trivial feature patches can take several month before final approval. > I ran this on a small project of mine that includes TableGen-generated files, > and with this patch misc-include-cleaner works great in that setup. Could you describe more presice how it was before and how it is now so we can see real-world benefits. > I believe it’s a key step toward making the check usable on LLVM itself. `include-cleaner` generally doesn't aling with LLVM guidelines: https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#include-as-little-as-possible. Guidelines allows (or even encourages) to use forward declarations and transitive includes. I can see the benefit of this tool only in removing unused includes. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/180282 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
