hfinkel added a comment.
> Note that in contrast to the original suggestion -fsource-asm here we use the
> preferred -fverbose-asm. Basically explicitly saying -fverbose-asm in the
> command line enables a minimum amount of debugging, so in AsmPrinter we can
> use it to print the source code.
rogfer01 added a comment.
> A somewhat obvious comment: no chance for this to be accepted without LIT
> tests. I understand you have your doubts on the best approach to testing --
> and it's OK to ask either here or on llvm-dev -- but tests should be added
> nevertheless.
Sure. I wasn't planni
andreybokhanko added a comment.
Hi Roger,
I'm very glad to see you started to work on this!
A somewhat obvious comment: no chance for this to be accepted without LIT
tests. I understand you have your doubts on the best approach to testing -- and
it's OK to ask either here or on llvm-dev -- but
rogfer01 created this revision.
This is the clang side of the RFC in
http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2017-February/052549.html
Note that in contrast to the original suggestion `-fsource-asm` here we use the
preferred `-fverbose-asm`. Basically explicitly saying `-fverbose-asm` in the
c
