On Jun 21, 2012, at 8:56 AM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 7:29 AM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
>
>> On 6/21/2012 10:17 AM, Nico Weber wrote:
>>> Is this ASTConsumer run in addition to codegen, instead of codegen, or
>>> is there an option to choose? I'd like to be able to have a plugin
>>> that runs in addition to codegen, which only provides additional
>>> diagnostics.
>>
>> In addition to. As I mentioned earlier, the use case of running a plugin
>> in lieu of codegen is one that I do not want to even support in the
>> first place. :-)
>
> I think it's still interesting to be able to run plugin actions instead of
> CodeGen. It's not certain yet, but we're (the static analyzer team) looking
> at plans to extract the analyzer and possibly the various Objective-C
> rewriters out of the main clang binary (or at least make them optionally
> built), and we'd rather not distribute two copies of Basic, Lex, Parse, AST,
> Sema, etc. that these kinds of alternate ASTActions would need.
I don't think we want the plugin infrastructure to support different actions;
rather, it should ride on the existing action that the build is doing and get a
chance to interpose itself with an additional ASTContext/PPCallbacks/etc
callback object.
- Doug
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
