[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: clang vs free software

From: Rüdiger Sonderfeld
Subject: Re: clang vs free software
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 17:34:10 +0100
User-agent: KMail/4.11.3 (Linux/3.11.0-14-generic; KDE/4.11.3; x86_64; ; )

On Tuesday 21 January 2014 17:25:59 address@hidden wrote:
> > GCC provides a plugin interface now which can be used to extract
> > information about the source.  I started writing a plugin and Emacs
> > interface based on that.  It can show the callgraph, jump to definition,
> > and show some information about symbols.  You simply add it to your
> > normal compiler call. But I didn't get very far and it requires a patched
> > version of the gcc-python plugin.
> > 
> > I hope I'll find enough time to continue working on it.  Maybe Clang
> > provides better integration.  But without an FFI it would have to be
> > linked into Emacs. And GCC is the main compiler I use anyway.
> Interesting. Do you know if the interfaces you use are also provided via
> gnome object introspection? Then I would love to try it out using the
> Emacs Xwidget branch, which provides an attempt at a GIR bridge for emacs.

I'm not loading any library in Emacs itself.  I have written plugins for GCC.  
They are loaded during the compile process (add -fplugin=./gccetags.so to the 
CXXFLAGS) and write data to a file.  For gcc-etags to a file in etag format 
and for the other experiment a sexp.

I haven't really looked at libclang.  Which could be loaded through an FFI.  I 
doubt that they are using Glib though or what would be needed for gnome object 


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]