> I'm happy to change this, but the only direct alternate was to make gccxml_parse have a clang_includes option. What would you suggest instead?

I think that this is OK, or possibly better yet have all of the parse() functions accept `*args, **kwargs`.  If we have gccxml_parse() accept an explicit clang_includes argument then the docstring for this function should say that the option is ignored and only present for API compatibility.  I don't think that this would be bad.

> In any case, the unit tests are going to have to make an rc object if we want them to read the global .xdressrc. Are you fine with that? Otherwise we need a totally different mechanism to solve the clang configuration problem.

The integration tests certainly do read the global rc files already since they run xdress in a subprocess.  The unit tests we could fake this by exec_file'ing the global rc files in the tests file.  Or we could make a utils function that reads the global rc files.  This would then be used by both main.py and the tests.  Once we have this, we'd pull the clang_includes option off of this rc object in the unit tests again.  So, yes, I am fine with the unit tests reading the global rc files.