rsmith added a comment. In D85802#2333105 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85802#2333105>, @leonardchan wrote:
> In D85802#2332895 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85802#2332895>, @phosek wrote: > >> In D85802#2332808 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D85802#2332808>, @rnk wrote: >> >>> Would "f[no-]fuchsia-c++-abi-extensions" (or shorter, -ffuchsia-c++-abi) do >>> the trick? I know it doesn't map well onto our current internal option >>> representation, but I don't think the internal representation is >>> particularly good. I'd rather limit the user-visible driver interface to >>> give us the flexibility to change the internal representation in the future. >> >> For our use case yes, we could have `-f[no-]fuchsia-c++-abi` which would be >> enabled by default when the target is Fuchsia. > > Will send out another patch that will use this instead. We can probably > revert this in the meantime. Have you considered using a different target triple for the different C++ ABI modes? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D85802/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85802 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
