ArcsinX wrote: > > Most of your arguments are about limited resources and solution simplicity, > > but we should focus on quality > > https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#quality > > Here we have performance regression in clangd (but we should not). > > This is controversial with the following suggestion to disable preamble PCH > completely. Again the support of modules in clangd right now is experimental.
If we decide to go this way, we can provide one more possible value for `-pch-storage` command line option (e.g. "none"). So, if a user wants more stable modules support at any cost, he can add `-pch-storage=none` (or maybe this can be set to "none" if we enable experimental C++20 modules support and `-pch-storage` was not set explicitly?). So, in this case we can say that this is a user decision. Also, the ability to disable preamble optimization can be useful in some other scenarios, including debugging hard to reproduce problem or maybe in read-only modes. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/187432 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
