bcraig added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17741#365457, @thakis wrote:
> > I think we can do this separately. A "basename" macro is easier for > > programmers to use and no build system change needed. > > > Hm, I would think that adding a flag to your CFLAGS is easier than getting > all your dependencies to use a clang-only new macro… Depends a lot on the person and code base. **Pro-macro situations:** I've had code bases where the bulk of the code refused to use compiler / environment provided preprocessor tokens. In those environments, all of the uses of __FILE__ and the like were in one place. Adding a compiler test and switching to __CLANG_FILE_BASENAME__ would be easy in those code bases. Changing CFLAGS in dozens of different compiles wouldn't. I've also seen uses of __FILE__ that would break if the file name changed drastically and unexpectedly. **Pro-compilation switch situation:** If __FILE__ is used in a lot of places, and the files are compiled with multiple compilers, then switching to a different macro would be problematic. If it is easy to change CFLAGS in all of your builds then the compilation switch makes sense. http://reviews.llvm.org/D17741 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
