dzbarsky wrote: > I left some more comments, but in general this change is far bigger than it > needs to be because it's trying to match the behavior of `cl::opt` one-to-one > which was never our goal. I'd recommend looking at some of the previous > conversions, the description of those changes has more details: > > * https://reviews.llvm.org/D105532 > > * https://reviews.llvm.org/D105598 > > * https://reviews.llvm.org/D105605 > > * https://reviews.llvm.org/D105330 > > * https://reviews.llvm.org/D104889
@petrhosek Thanks for sharing those, I've taken a stab at reworking this PR to align with the semantic flag changes made in the other ones, such as dropping the single-dash long flags for consistency, removing `=` flags, simplifying bool flag handling, etc. This required a lot of changes to tests but it's a fairly mechanical update and aligns better with other tools, so maybe worth it? Not sure. Mind taking another look at the llvm-profdata main and let me know if you see additional opportunities to use OptTable better? Would love to get this merged! https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/177868 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
