Potentially add libclang as a build dependency
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Jinja
- Stars
- 542
- Forks
- 185
- Avg merge
- 22h 15m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
We (V8) are considering changing so of our codegen (in particular, instance type allocation) from being generated by Torque based on torque object definitions, into being generated by a libclang-based helper program that parses C++ object definitions -- the goal is to eventually remove the Torque object definitions entirely and have a single source of truth in C++. We likely don't need a bleeding-edge libclang since we're not going crazy with syntax here and libclang is relatively stable.
We're looking to make this part of the build rather than checking it in (like static roots) because the ifdef explosion is likely to be more severe. We want to make sure that downstream embedders are not entirely broken by this approach, and have some solution that's compatible with our plans. Please let me know if there are any insurmountable obstacles for you with an approach like this.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no files, tests, or entry points. Start by evaluating the proposed libclang-based helper and its impact on downstream embedders; the work is complete only when a compatible build-dependency approach is agreed on, but no concrete acceptance criteria are provided.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- cpp
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Active
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100