On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 3:59 PM Steve Downey <sdowney_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> The compilation db is at least nominally JSON, so the strings are Unicode.
> The names of files and directories are not.
>

I was under the impression that POSIX doesn't specify an encoding, but
says the bytes 0x00 and 0x2f (/) are special. Thus, if we want to do
unicode file names, it's pretty much utf-8 that fits, which if I'm not
mistaken most OS'es are now using?


> If you stick to ascii, you won't notice. But if you transcode a filename
> to unicode the filesystem might not recognize it anymore.
>
> This might be a reasonable tradeoff, that you need to have your file names
> in a unicode encoding, but it's not the current state of the world.
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:52 AM Manuel Klimek <klimek_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 2:30 PM Steve Downey <sdowney_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm pretty sure compilation DB totally ignores this, and is easy to get
>>> invalid json in. Makefile syntax would care somewhat less.
>>
>>
>> What specifically do you mean? The encoding or the path?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I don't think it would be the worst thing for these tools to require
>>> Unicode without any normalization. You have to be able to fopen, and that
>>> means an exact match. I don't know the state of the world for Windows for
>>> utf-8 vs ucs2. Can we reliably get the file open?
>>>
>>> I think the TR can place more requirements than the IS can on file
>>> names.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 04:50 Manuel Klimek <klimek_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:01 AM Ben Boeckel <ben.boeckel_at_[hidden]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 09:52:34 +0100, Manuel Klimek wrote:
>>>>> > In the compilation database (
>>>>> > https://clang.llvm.org/docs/JSONCompilationDatabase.html) we
>>>>> specify the
>>>>> > build dir for each file.
>>>>>
>>>>> But that is (generally) output from the build system, not the compiler.
>>>>> The build system knows because…well, it does. The compiler is just
>>>>> invoked in a working directory and given no indication of where a
>>>>> "root"
>>>>> directory is (and I think it might be silly to pass it on the command
>>>>> line just to have it in this file, but maybe not).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can't the compiler put in the current work directory it's been called
>>>> with? That's what I'd expect.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tooling mailing list
>>>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tooling mailing list
>>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tooling mailing list
>> Tooling_at_[hidden]
>> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Tooling mailing list
> Tooling_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/tooling
>