aprantl added inline comments.
================
Comment at:
source/Plugins/ExpressionParser/Clang/ClangModulesDeclVendor.cpp:595-601
+ if (Path.empty()) {
+ // This code is copied from the Clang driver.
+ const bool erased_on_reboot = false;
+ llvm::sys::path::system_temp_directory(erased_on_reboot, Path);
+ llvm::sys::path::append(Path, "org.llvm.clang");
+ llvm::sys::path::append(Path, "ModuleCache");
+ }
----------------
jingham wrote:
> Is there a reason not to have GetClangModulesCachePath do this? This is
> roughly the "default value" of the value. Is there a good reason to make
> clients compute that?
>
> I presume you are computing this here because clang doesn't offer an API to
> do that?
> Is there a reason not to have GetClangModulesCachePath do this?
Yes. It is supposed to return the value of the *property*. Also, I assume that
Target doesn't necessarily link against Clang, so calling into a Clang API
there seems to be a layering violation.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D43099
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
