On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Sun, 22.02.15 14:56, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> > For info I am attaching a diff with the changes so far: 1309 includes
>> > removed out of the current 7707. It is only compile and "make
>> > check"-tested. I
On Sun, 22.02.15 14:56, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > For info I am attaching a diff with the changes so far: 1309 includes
> > removed out of the current 7707. It is only compile and "make
> > check"-tested. I am only looking for comments (and perhaps compile
> > testing on a
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 11:53 PM, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:05 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 07.02.15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
>>> One w
On Wed, 11.02.15 23:46, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 11.02.15 01:40, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> Yep. Makes sense.
> >>
> >> Here is a status on what I have done so far.
> >>
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 11:46:37PM +0100, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 11.02.15 01:40, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >> Yep. Makes sense.
> >>
> >> Here is a status on what I have done so far.
> >>
>
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 11.02.15 01:40, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> Yep. Makes sense.
>>
>> Here is a status on what I have done so far.
>>
>> include-what-you-want does the following:
>> 1) sorts the includes
>> 2) adds missing
On Wed, 11.02.15 01:40, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Yep. Makes sense.
>
> Here is a status on what I have done so far.
>
> include-what-you-want does the following:
> 1) sorts the includes
> 2) adds missing headers for any symbols used
> 3) adds forward declarations
> 4) rem
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Mon, 09.02.15 10:19, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> include-what-you-use is actually pretty nice. It is also a little bit
>> crazy. It wants to include everything directly and we would add a lot
>> includes for e
On Mon, 09.02.15 10:19, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> include-what-you-use is actually pretty nice. It is also a little bit
> crazy. It wants to include everything directly and we would add a lot
> includes for errno.h, string.h, stdlib.h, stdbool.h, stddef.h, etc etc
> everywhe
On Sat, 07.02.15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen (pho...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
> One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
> still works after removing each include one at a time. It does this in
> reve
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Ronny Chevalier
> wrote:
>> 2015-02-07 14:05 GMT+01:00 Daniele Nicolodi :
>>> On 07/02/15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Ronny Chevalier
wrote:
> 2015-02-07 14:05 GMT+01:00 Daniele Nicolodi :
>> On 07/02/15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
>>> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
>>> One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
>>
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Daniele Nicolodi wrote:
> On 07/02/15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
>> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
>> One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
>> still works after removing each include one at a
2015-02-07 14:05 GMT+01:00 Daniele Nicolodi :
> On 07/02/15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
>> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
>> One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
>> still works after removing each include one at a time. It do
On 07/02/15 10:29, Thomas H.P. Andersen wrote:
> I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
> One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
> still works after removing each include one at a time. It does this in
> reverse order for all includes in the
Hi,
I am looking at ways to automatically trim the unnecessary includes.
One way to do it is a script[1] which simply tests if the compile
still works after removing each include one at a time. It does this in
reverse order for all includes in the .c files. Using -Werror we catch
any new warnings
16 matches
Mail list logo
