Anastasia added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Driver/Types.cpp:265
.Case("cl", TY_CL)
+ .Case("clcpp", TY_CLCXX)
.Case("cp", TY_CXX)
----------------
svenvh wrote:
> mantognini wrote:
> > I'm not sure we want that -- I'm actually fine if we don't -- but I see
> > below `c++` and `cxx` are supported in addition to `cpp`. Should we
> > therefore also have `clc++` and `clcxx` as file valid extensions for
> > consistency? I wonder what the general opinion is.
> And there is also `.cc` above. Since you're asking for opinions, my personal
> opinion is that one extension should be enough, and providing a CL
> counterpart for all existing C++ file extensions does not bring more value.
FYI, there are some more discussions on RFC thread
https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2021-February/067703.html
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96771/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D96771
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
