ChuanqiXu added a comment.
> IMO, this is not suitable; there must be *one* depfile for Ninja to work
> (otherwise build tools will need to manually collate all of this into one for
> ninja.
Yeah, but the producer of the compilation database is able to create a
compilation db with the same `-MF` option. Do you mean you will feel much
better that the clang-scan-deps will have a strong check?
>> 2. (The original way) Specify -MF in the command line of clang-scan-deps.
>
> I feel this scales and communicates what is happening much better because it
> actually is a flag for clang-scan-deps itself.
There is a related problem that how do we set the target of the dependency? In
per file mode, we can easily specify it in the command line of clang-scan-deps.
But we have to extract them ("-MT") from the command line with compilation
database. (Otherwise all the targets have the same name, which is incorrect).
Do you think it is acceptable?
> In what mode will clang output #include information without erroring about
> missing .pcm files for import statements? -E -fdirectives-only perhaps? This
> further exacerbates the need for "fake" command lines and costs on platforms
> with expensive process execution.
After we land D137526 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137526>, we are able to do
this by: `-M -MF <dep_file> -E`.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139168/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D139168
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
