4 ms·
> If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR! How about compiler?
by zx8080 7mo ago
> If those tools are writing the code then in general I do expect that to be included in the PR!
How about compiler?
- rogerrogerr 7mo agoAre you checking in compiled artifacts? Then yeah, we should have a chain of where that binary blob came from.
- ben-schaaf 7mo agoCompilers don't usually write the code that ends up in a PR. But compilers do (and should) generally leave behind some metadata in the end result saying what tools were used, see for example the .comment section in ELF binaries.
- catlifeonmars 7mo agoCompiler versions are usually included in the package manifest. Generally you include commit info compiler version and compilation date and platform embedded in the binaries that compilers produce.
- kuschku 7mo agoDo you check in binaries into your git history? If so, you should mark a commit as generated, and the commit message (plus repository state) should be enough to recreate it 1:1. Similarly, if I use e.g. jextract or uniffi to generate Java interfaces from C code and check that in, I'll create tooling to automatically run those, and the commit will be attributed to that tooling.