On Fri, Mar 7, 2025 at 9:38 AM Peter Eisentraut <pe...@eisentraut.org> wrote: > Just to clarify this: Nobody has gone through and used IWYU to clean up > indirect includes, as you appear to imagine here. My recent IWYU work > was, besides putting some infrastructure in place, to clean up includes > that are completely unneeded. Indirect includes cleanup is a different > project that is not currently happening, AFAIK.
OK, thanks. I wonder whether that's a good use of effort or just not worth worrying about. > Also, benign typedef redefinitions are a C11 feature. In practice, all > compilers currently in play support it, and the only problem you'll get > is from the buildfarm members that are explicitly set up to warn about > accidental C11 use. We could probably have a discussion about that, but > for this patch set, it's probably better to just deal with the status quo. Agreed. +1 for having a discussion at some point, though, because the effect of the current rules seems to be that you have to write "struct BananaSplit *" in a bunch of places instead of just 'BananaSplit *" to avoid redefining the typedef. That's worth doing it if it solves a real problem, but if compilers where it is a real problem are extinct in the wild, then I think I would prefer not to have to add the "struct" keyword in a bunch of places just for compliance with historical compiler behavior. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
