mstorsjo added a comment.
In D102812#2770821 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D102812#2770821>, @DavidSpickett
wrote:
> Given that using both options currently crashes clang (therefore no one is
> relying on this yet) and GCC doesn't have `-mimplicit-it` I think what you
> have is actually the best way to go. If the two options agree, fine, if they
> don't, error. Let's not make it more complicated than it has to be.
Well it's complicated in the sense that there is an error diagnostic that we
need to provide, and all that. Just picking the last set value should be fine
too and simplifies the code in that sense.
I'll update the patch with the code in that form, and let you say what you
think of that form. If you think we should keep the error though, I'll add it
back (and see if I need to add a new diagnostic id for that case, to get a
proper error mesasge). It's a bit inconsistent in the sense that one can pass
multiple conflicting options via each of the options (where the last one of
each wins); gas does handle it in that way too, but two different kinds of
options error out instead.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:2369
-static bool AddARMImplicitITArgs(const ArgList &Args, ArgStringList &CmdArgs,
+static bool CheckARMImplicitITArg(StringRef Value) {
+ return Value == "always" || Value == "never" || Value == "arm" ||
----------------
MaskRay wrote:
> Use `functionName` for new functions.
Hmm, the whole rest of the file uses function names starting with a capital, so
they do look a bit out of place if adding one new that differs...
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D102812/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D102812
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
