MaskRay added a comment. In D137753#3935305 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935305>, @francii wrote:
> Recall that the goal with `-p` is to create parity with GCC (at least with > Linux and AIX), as per the RFC discussion. > > In D137753#3935138 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935138>, @MaskRay wrote: > >> In D137753#3935126 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935126>, @francii >> wrote: >> >>> In D137753#3934932 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3934932>, @MaskRay >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Please make `-p` accepted for AIX only and don't change the semantics for >>>> other targets in this patch. For FreeBSD and Linux (musl and gnu) we can >>>> try rejecting `-p`. If OpenBSD wants to make `-p` an alias for `-pg`, >>>> that's fine. >>> >>> We can make `-p` emit a message on Linux while also accepting it as an >>> alias to `-pg`. Do you have a suggestion as to what that message would be? >> >> The current `warning: argument unused during compilation: '-p' >> [-Wunused-command-line-argument]` is good for Linux. >> In the future Linux can try removing `-p`. > > The current behaviour of ignoring the option without stopping with an error > return code is not a good one. > > Recall that the goal is to create parity with GCC, as per the RFC post. > > Is there a reason this flag shouldn't be supported on Linux? Specifically, > what is your justification for diverging from GCC on this matter? It's a legacy option and we don't want the usage to grow. I objected in the RFC, either. Note that the objection is not only from me, also from a Linux distro folk I checked with. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
