ben.boeckel added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/tools/clang-scan-deps/ClangScanDeps.cpp:197
+llvm::cl::opt<std::string> P1689TargetedCommand(
+ "p1689-targeted-command", llvm::cl::Optional,
+ llvm::cl::desc("Only supported for P1689, the targeted command of which "
----------------
ChuanqiXu wrote:
> ben.boeckel wrote:
> > ChuanqiXu wrote:
> > > ben.boeckel wrote:
> > > > Can this be something like `--` so that I don't have to figure out how
> > > > to quote the thing (for the shell and whatever parsing Clang does
> > > > internally)?
> > > Yeah, it can. Both `-` and `--` are accepted. I've updated the test to
> > > disambiguate.
> > I don't mean the flag using `--` as a prefix. I don't care about that. What
> > I *do* care about is having to quote everything I'd give to `clang` here.
> > I'd vastly prefer something like:
> >
> > ```
> > clang-scan-deps -p1689-targeted-file-name=… -p1689-use-command -- -flags
> > --for ---clang --go --here
> > ```
> I got your point. But I prefer the current style if it won't be a problem for
> you to quote the options. In my imagination, it would be easier for the build
> systems to quote the flags than we synthesis things here. I guess there
> should already be one existing command line in the build system. And I feel
> like the current style may be more convenient and friendly for other tools to
> use. Could you try to use the current style?
I don't think CMake has a mechanism for that at all right now. The problem is
knowing how to quote things. Is it specified how Clang will parse this string
into arguments? Is it platform-dependent?
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
