rnk added a comment. In D64067#1592201 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64067#1592201>, @troyj wrote:
> Hi, we just inherited this commit at Cray when we did our latest upstream > merge and there are a few problems with it that I'd like to point out. Sorry > that I was not part of the initial discussion here, but I didn't know that > this work was being done and I had already done it for x86 in our downstream > compiler a while ago. > > 1. This patch adds the -m options to f_Group, which is weird. They should be > in m_Group since they are target-specific. I actually implemented them as > part of a subgroup of m_Group so that I can take the last option from that > group that appears on the command line. Oops, seems like a bug. > 2. This patch lacks the GNU -mlong-double-80 option for x86. > 3. Instead of tracking the size in clang/Basic/LangOptions.def, I track it in > clang/Basic/TargetOptions.h. This is a target-specific thing afterall. Sema needs to know about this option for `sizeof(long double)`. I believe that's the guiding line between the various option kinds. However, it means almost everything ends up being a language option, for better or worse. > We're trying to resolve merge conflicts with this change and might be able to > submit a patch to help reduce our differences. Would that be of interest? Sounds good. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D64067/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D64067 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
