dexonsmith added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D51440#1225318, @steven_wu wrote:
> I do prefer the current approach especially on Darwin. Some concerns of > switching to use "-L + -l" are: > > 1. clang and compiler-rt are rev-locked. Inferring the compiler-rt from > resource-dir and passing to linker with the full path can prevent mistakes of > mixing them up. > 2. This change does change linker semantics on Darwin. ld64 treats the inputs > from command line with highest priority. Currently ld64 will use compiler-rt > symbols before any other libraries passed in with -l flag. If clang decide to > pass compiler-rt with -l flag, any other libraries (static or dynamic) that > passed with -l flag will takes the priority over compiler-rt. This can lead > to unexpected behavior. I tend to agree with Steven. I'd rather avoid a semantic change here. Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D51440 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
