mstorsjo added a comment. In D80876#2071997 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80876#2071997>, @sbc100 wrote:
> In D80876#2070233 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80876#2070233>, @mstorsjo wrote: > > > In D80876#2069970 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80876#2069970>, @sbc100 wrote: > > > > > Do you know how gcc handles this case when running on mingw? > > > > > > It uses the gnu/unix quoting style - so that's the case for wanting clang > > to preserve compatibility with that behaviour. > > > Is there any case where gcc on windows will use the windows quoting style? Not that I'm aware of, no. > If the answer is no, and I assume GNU ar is the same, then perhaps the > solution is revert https://reviews.llvm.org/D69665 instead and have all the > llvm tools except clang-cl default to the GNU style. Hmm, that might be at least one consistent strategy. For llvm-ar, it'd default to posix quoting, while llvm-lib does use windows style quoting. (It probably doesn't need a full revert, but keeping the rsp-quoting option, just changing the default.) In one sense, it feels weird to stop doing the native thing in these tools, just for the sake of the mingw usecase - but on the other hand, if there's no other predecent for using windows style quoting with those particular tools, and there is predecent for keeping the posix quoting, I guess it should be fine. That would at least be a path forward without potentially breaking the msys2/mingw ecosystem. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80876/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80876 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
