Small note on static analyzer, includes and build times...

[Albert Thuswaldner]

Hi Stephan and Michael,

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 09:03, Stephan Bergmann <sbergman at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Nice approach.  :)  One remark re "Looking for .cxx files whose first
> include is not the header file...":  I did not look into the articles you
> cite to see whether or why they advocate to include the corresponding header
> first in the .cxx file

According to the article that is the "most important guideline" taken
from this book:

Large Scale C++ Software Design by John Lakos
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201633620

Makes one curious doesn't it? See if one can get hold of that book,
seems applicable for LO development.

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 19:12, Michael Meeks <michael.meeks at suse.com> wrote:
>
>        Well - the pre-compiled headers would make -tons- of includes look
> useless anyway, though (I thought) we had decided to get rid of them as
> an under-maintained and bad job anyway ;-)
>
>        Have you tried acting on this lot:
>
> Looking for useless includes in header files...
>        AccessibleCell.hxx --> global.hxx (useless)
>        AccessibleCellBase.hxx --> global.hxx (useless)
>        AccessiblePreviewHeaderCell.hxx --> global.hxx (useless)
>        AccessibleTableBase.hxx --> global.hxx (useless)
>        ...
>
>        And turning it into some patches to remove those headers & seeing if it
> compiles nicely ? if so it'd be nice to include that no doubt.
>

Sure, I can do that, I'll give it a spin and see if it pops...

/Albert