On Jun 17, 2013, at 14:08 , Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dmitri Gribenko wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Jordan Rose >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hm. Does clang-check really need the static analyzer? Can it be made >>> optional there as well? It seems weird that >>> CLANG_ENABLE_STATIC_ANALYZER=0 would completely prevent clang-check from >>> building. >> >> IIRC, one can do 'clang-check -analyze ...' >> >> Maybe adding an #ifdef in clang-check source would help. >> > > I see no reason to create a version of clang-check which accepts different > arguments based on how it was built. I prefer to simply require the static > analyzer for that tool, and I don't see why it would be a problem. Well, that's essentially what happens with the core Clang binary and --analyze, though we don't spread that around much. I won't block the patch, and we certainly don't want to leave the CMake build broken, but clang-check certainly does more than just 'clang-check -analyze ...', and it seems to be arbitrarily limiting to remove that. I guess I would include a FIXME to properly conditionalize clang-check for CLANG_ENABLE_STATIC_ANALYZER, but then go ahead and commit. Jordan
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
