> Le 3 sept. 2020 à 17:31, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> This addition to the .gitignore is for the individual JSON files (one per source file), >> that are placed in the $(compdb_dir). >> I think naming "rebase.o.json" the JSON file that describes how to compile "rebase.c" >> into "rebase.o" makes sense. I don't know what is the convention for other projects. > > I agree rebase.o.$somesuffix does make sense, but I do not know > 'json' is a great value for $somesuffix. I wouldn't be surprised if > 'cdb' or some other silly abbreviation for "compilation database" is > how other people use this feature. > > Those watching from the sidelines. Does anybody know if there is an > established convention used by other projects? If we hear nothing > by early next week, let's declare 'json' is good enough and move on. > >> The name `compile_commands.json` for the database itself is standard. >> The name of the directory where the '*.o.json' files are placed is a name >> I chose, and I don't feel strongly about it. I thought it made sense to name >> it like that, then its purpose is clear. We could make it a hidden directory >> if we don't want to add a new folder to the root of the repo when using this feature. > > I think both of these are sensible. Again if we hear nothing about > common practice, let's move on with these constants as-is. OK. > >>>> +ifdef GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE >>>> +compdb_check = $(shell $(CC) $(ALL_CFLAGS) \ >>>> + -c -MJ /dev/null \ >>>> + -x c /dev/null -o /dev/null 2>&1; \ >>>> + echo $$?) >>>> +ifeq ($(compdb_check),0) >>>> +override GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE = yes >>> >>> This feels strange. If the end user said to GENERATE and we find we >>> are capable, we still override to 'yes'? What if the end user set >>> 'no' to the GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE macro? Shouldn't we be >>> honoring that wish? >> >> We should. I'll tweak (and simplify) that for v3. > > I think > > - GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE is set to 'no': don't even probe > > - GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE is set to 'yes': probe and turn it > to 'no' if unavailable. > > - GENERATE_COMPILATION_DATABASE is set to anything else: either > error out, or turn it into 'no' (I have no preference between > them). > > would cover all the cases. I agree. I'll do that. > >>>> +compdb_file = $(compdb_dir)$(subst .-,,$(subst /,-,$(dir $@)))$(notdir $@).json >>> >>> This detail does not matter as long as the end result ensures unique >>> output for all source files, but I am having trouble guessing what >>> the outermost subst, which removes ".-" sequence, is trying to make >>> prettier. Care to explain? >> >> Yes, it is because the `$(dir $@)` Makefile function will return `./` for source files >> at the base of the repo, so the JSON files get named eg. `.-rebase.o.json` and then they are >> hidden. So it's just to make them non-hidden, so as not to confuse someone that would >> count the number of source files and compare with the number of (non-hidden) >> '*.o.json' files in $(comdb_dir) and get a different number. > > Hmph. Would $(subst /,-,$@) instead of "only substitute leading > directory part, and concatenate the basename part unmolested" work > better then? After all, by definition the basename part would not > have a slash in it, so substituting all '/' to '-' in the whole > pathname should do the same thing and we won't have to worry about > the spurious './', no? This indeed works, and reads better. Thanks!
