On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 16:04 +0200, Noel Grandin wrote:
Another way is to use a clang plugin to generate a more accurate list
of definitions and call sites.
That's what I would do, because clang would handle all of the macro
and language parsing.
Completely agreed; I imagine it would be necessary to write some
intermediate format out from each clang compile - and then crunch those
together afterwards to see what was actually used.
Hopefully - given the level of context that clang has - it'd be
reasonably easy to identify and elide virtual methods even DLLPUBLIC
ones - though we would presumably want to white-list any UNO interfaces'
virtual methods - which may well never be called; yet can't be removed.
The compilerplugins/ directory has some nice README about plugins and
all the good things they can do :-) Potentially with a double pass
through the code - clang could auto-generate diffs of things o
remove ;->
HTH,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@suse.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.