On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:25 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Devang Patel <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Oct 20, 2011, at 4:14 PM, Nick Lewycky wrote: > >> On 20 October 2011 16:00, Devang Patel <[email protected]> wrote: >> What about following approach... >> >> I don't like it because we've been nearly successful avoiding things which >> would diverge a Google-build of clang from an open-source build of clang. Is >> there no way we can get this functionality without an ifdef? Is there a >> reason you don't like adding a flag? > > Essentially, what you're looking for to say is, "on this platform use pwd". > Have you considered an alternative to use configure check to enable use of > PWD ? > > I want you to exhaust all alternatives before deciding to add a command line > flag. Adding a command line flag is usually easy way out, but removing an > command line flag is almost impossible. > > But hold on, the latest proposal has no such flag. We have an *internal* flag > for the CC1 layer merely to factor the logic that deals with platforms and > shells and other such oddities into the driver. Users will never see or use > this flag. > > Also, PWD is a useful thing to base the working directory on for many > platforms. Mac, Linux, BSD, etc. I think Nick's latest patch is very clean > and minimal. The Frontend has a clear narrow and explicit interface with no > system knowledge (it uses a flag, but an internal one). The Driver > automatically sets that flag appropriately based on the user's system, no > flags or other changes necessary. Ok, fine with me! - Devang
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
