MaskRay added a comment. In D137753#3935617 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935617>, @francii wrote:
> In D137753#3935391 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137753#3935391>, @MaskRay wrote: > >> 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 (at least for Linux, FreeBSD, etc) 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. > > If we aren't adding Linux functionality, we should make it throw an error at > the same time. > > Once again, ignoring the option without stopping with an error code is not > ideal. I can update this patch to throw an error on Linux, much like this > patch for z/OS: https://reviews.llvm.org/D137756 I acknowledge that the current state is bad. Reject it for FreeBSD/Linux (perhaps most OSes. An OS can opt in if their platform really needs this) is likely fine. I don't think `-p` has many uses. Something like D137756 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137756> will be nice, but I think it can be done in clang/lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp: D138255 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138255> 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
