Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Sorry I totally forgot. Taking a look now, I will add you to a reviewer when I have an alternative patch! Thanks for the reminder. On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 15:20, Nico Weber wrote: > > Have you had a chance to look at making this change? > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Yuka Takahashi wrote: >>

Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Have you had a chance to look at making this change? On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:08 AM Yuka Takahashi wrote: > Sounds good! > > 2018-04-09 15:03 GMT+02:00 Nico Weber : > >> Yes. >> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Yuka Takahashi wrote: >> >>> Hi Nico, >>> >>> Thanks for your comment! >>> >>> I

Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Sounds good! 2018-04-09 15:03 GMT+02:00 Nico Weber : > Yes. > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Yuka Takahashi wrote: > >> Hi Nico, >> >> Thanks for your comment! >> >> I do agree that this code is hacky. Do you mean to ask tablegen to >> generate

Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Yes. On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 9:00 AM, Yuka Takahashi wrote: > Hi Nico, > > Thanks for your comment! > > I do agree that this code is hacky. Do you mean to ask tablegen to > generate Checkers.inc under Driver so that we can do like this? : > #define CHECKER(FULLNAME, CLASS,

Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Hi Nico, Thanks for your comment! I do agree that this code is hacky. Do you mean to ask tablegen to generate Checkers.inc under Driver so that we can do like this? : #define CHECKER(FULLNAME, CLASS, DESCFILE, HT, G, H) FULLNAME "," #include "clang/Driver/Checkers.inc" #undef GET_CHECKERS

Re: r311958 - Revert "Revert r311552: [Bash-autocompletion] Add support for static analyzer flags"

Hi Yuka, sorry about the late review comment on this. I just happened to see that this lets Driver's Option.inc depend on StaticAnalyzer/Checker's Checker.inc. However, Driver does not depend on StaticAnalyzer/Checker. In practice, it works ok because of all tablegen targets being collected into