================
Comment at: lib/Driver/Tools.cpp:6721
@@ +6720,3 @@
+
+  // FIXME: If we've put clang-cl as cl.exe on the path, then we might have a 
problem now :/
+  const char *Exec =
----------------
Reid Kleckner wrote:
> Hans Wennborg wrote:
> > Reid Kleckner wrote:
> > > That seems problematic.  You could use sys::fs::equivalent() to skip a 
> > > path if it's the current executable, but we'd have to sink that into 
> > > GetProgramPath().
> > On the good side, we're not passing /fallback through to the second 
> > invocation, so we don't get stuck forever :)
> > 
> > On the bad side, I don't think checking sys::fs::equivalent() would work, 
> > because the cl.exe on the PATH could be a copy of clang-cl.exe, as in the 
> > case of the current VS integration :/
> > 
> > It seems that automatically looking for the "true" cl.exe could get pretty 
> > messy.
> > 
> > What do you think about having an option, like /fallbackcommand <foo>? 
> > Ideally, the VS integration could set this automagically, and it would also 
> > be useful for testing (we could set this to "echo" or something and test 
> > the actual execution of the fallback).
> I agree it could get messy, but I think there's an important common case, 
> which is where the currently running compiler is the cl.exe on PATH, and the 
> next cl.exe on PATH is MSVC.  That's the set up we use for VS project files, 
> so it's pretty important for users.  I'm fine handling that as a followup, 
> though.
Ah, yes. I was thinking we'd need to have a general "is cl.exe really 
clang-cl.exe" check, but that's not what we need for this case. I'll address 
this in a follow-up.


http://llvm-reviews.chandlerc.com/D1711
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to