dschuff added a comment. In D85685#2275585 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85685#2275585>, @sbc100 wrote:
> Seems reasonable. Do you think this way is cleaner than the way elf does > it? Looks like ELF creates two different ELFWriter inside the > ELFDwoObjectWriter subclass right? Yeah, ELF splits ELFWriter out from ELFObjectWriter, and then instantiates it twice. It's all because ELFObjectWriter has to derive from MCObjectWriter which was clearly not designed with this in mind. I found the class split to be a bit awkward, but I don't really have strong feelings about it either way. > Are we going need to wasm-ld tests to followup or is this really independent > of the linker? It should be independent of the linker because the dwo files don't get linked by the linker. They can be used independently (or combined by the `dwp` tool but AFAIK it's simpler than the linker). And the object files are just the same as usual from the linker's perspective. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85685/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85685 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
