daltenty added a comment. In D69356#1726527 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356#1726527>, @hubert.reinterpretcast wrote:
> In D69356#1726354 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356#1726354>, @beanz wrote: > > > If what you say is correct that "no dead strip" is harmful to plugins on > > some platforms it seems like this rename was a step in the direction of > > more confusion. > > > Only when focusing on the implementation and not the intent. Indeed, the goal of this rename was trying to clarify the the intent of this option and separate it from it's implementation, which will need to vary by platform and will do so in a follow on patch on AIX. > Perhaps the more accurate intent for both the JIT host process and the > plug-in support case is that the executable is expected to make symbols > available for run-time linking. Maybe `LLVM_EXPORT_SYMBOLS_FROM_EXEC` is a > better name? I'm in favor of this name, the proposed option name was chosen because the only current usage seemed to be with plugins. I think LLVM_EXPORT_SYMBOLS_FROM_EXEC much more correctly expresses what users expect the option to do for them with out tying it to the specific mechanism (which may include avoiding dead striping on some platforms but not others) and would accommodate both uses Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
