phosek added a comment. In D101479#2733622 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D101479#2733622>, @mstorsjo wrote:
> In D101479#2733434 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D101479#2733434>, @thakis wrote: > >> In D101479#2733354 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D101479#2733354>, @mstorsjo >> wrote: >> >>> Not sure if we want the desicion between static and shared libc++ be >>> coupled with `/MT` and `/MD`, as one can quite plausibly want to use e.g. a >>> static libc++ with `/MD`. >> >> Right, I meant more "how do users pick if they want a statically or >> dynamically linked libc++". Sounds like you get a dynamic libc++ by default. >> Since Windows doesn't have rpaths afaik, using `-stdlib=libc++` means you'll >> get an executable that won't start, unless you know to copy the libc++ dll >> next to your executable with this patch as-is, yes? > > Yes, that sounds correct. > > As for how people choose - I guess unless you resort to trickery - you use > whichever is default in the libc++ build that is used. > > However, the libc++ headers inject linker directives to pull in the right > form of the lib, matching the linkage of the headers. So as long as that > isn't disabled, the clang driver shouldn't need to specify any lib to link > against at all. On other platforms the decision whether to use static or shared is controlled by `-static-libstdc++`, does CL have a similar flag or shall we support `-static-libstdc++` in MSVC driver as well? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D101479/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D101479 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
