MaskRay added a comment. In D139717#4001704 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#4001704>, @davide wrote:
> In D139717#4001702 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#4001702>, @MaskRay wrote: > >> In D139717#4001688 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#4001688>, @davide wrote: >> >>> In D139717#4001685 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#4001685>, @MaskRay >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In D139717#3998077 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#3998077>, @manojgupta >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Xlinker still works. Xcompiler is failing. >>>>> >>>>> A google search will show that Xcompiler is a wide-spread option used by >>>>> many packages. Whether or not GCC supports it is not relevant. Please do >>>>> not remove options just because you do not use them. >>>> >>>> Can you give an example how they use `-Xcompiler`? >>>> >>>> % gcc -Xcompiler,-fpic -c a.c >>>> gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option ‘-Xcompiler,-fpic’ >>>> % gcc -Xcompiler -fpic -c a.c >>>> gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option ‘-Xcompiler’; did you mean >>>> ‘--compile’? >>>> >>>> My commit message clearly says why the joined form is awkward and should >>>> be removed. >>>> It seems that the many occurrences you found are likely for GNU libtool >>>> (`-Xcompiler foo` `-Wc,foo`), not for Clang Driver. >>> >>> This is not about the philosophical correctness of the patch, it's about >>> the transition period and allowing consumers to migrate. >>> If you want remove options, provide a deprecation window, and then remove. >>> Noone is objecting about that. >> >> `-Xparser` has always been leading to such a warning: `warning: argument >> unused during compilation: '-Xparser' [-Wunused-command-line-argument]`, >> perhaps since forever when the option was added in the first place? >> The message is different from `... deprecation ...` but isn't it sufficient >> as well? > > Yes. it is. "unused" doesn't mean "will go away". > Sometimes if you pass linker flags to the compiler you get the same "unused" > warning. Noone expects them to go away. > > Hope this helps. Sorry, it doesn't help. A compiler option used a linker option leading to a "unused" warning is very different from this case. I can understand that many `CFLAGS` options may end up in linking with a `-Wunused-command-line-argument` warning. For practicality we must support them, as they are used in other phases. In your case, at least as stated in the commit message, `This change is breaking internal builds.` This is only for `-Xparser`. Then why can't you just add a `def : Flag<["-"], "Xparser">`? It seems that GCC < 4.6 reports `g++: unrecognized option '-Xfoo'` but exit with 0 while GCC >= 4.6 reports `g++: error: unrecognized option '-Xaaa'` and exits with 1. I don't think GCC ever supports `-Xcompiler` or `-Xparser`, so `IgnoredGCCCompat` is not justified. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
