compnerd added a comment. I may be a bit biased but I agree with @bob.wilson and @steven_wu. The current names are better from the user’s perspective. GCC’s build is a very bad example as it has runtime components built as part of it (libgcc). When building any code, even in a Canadian cross-compile, the target will always be what you are running on. The preprocessor macros are part of the code that you are building for a given target. The association with the command line option makes it more obvious what it is going to use to determine the value. Having a pithy name should also be considered a design goal. Recreating new terminology only muddles the problem.
Even if you are compiling a compiler, there is nothing special. It is a standard user space program that will run on a specific target. Even if you treat it as a perspective of the program, if you bootstrap on Linux, the bootstrapping compiler’s Target will be Linux even if the final compiler has a target of Windows. The compiler is answering from the perspective of the program :) Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D44753 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
