davide added a comment. In D140224#4014245 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224#4014245>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D140224#4014234 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224#4014234>, @davide wrote: > >> In D140224#4014230 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224#4014230>, @MaskRay >> wrote: >> >>> In D140224#4014203 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224#4014203>, @davide >>> wrote: >>> >>>> @MaskRay Roy hasn't replied. We found other spellings that break (e.g. >>>> `-Xcctests` or something). Revert this patch until we find an agreement. >>> >>> D139717 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717> (this patch reverts) was pushed >>> when I made valid comments which were ignored. I did not complain for that. >>> >>> I don't mind if you work around `-Xcctests` in a similar way. >> >> Working around 3 cases creates more complexity than it fixes. >> We're also not providing a deprecation path for users. This needs to be >> discussed more thoroughly. I'll go ahead and revert to the previous status. >> >> Thanks. > > Have you seen https://reviews.llvm.org/D139717#4001712 I have analyzed that > such `-X*` has `-Wunused-command-line-argument` warning for many many years. > I'm not sure how is considered insufficient. > > "Working around 3 cases creates more complexity than it fixes." the number > isn't that high. By enumerating the misuse, we have a valid path to remove > all workarounds as misuses are fixed. > This made some forward progress. You can't just remove options willy-nilly. This is not how drivers work. The warning says "unused", it doesn't say "it goes away". If we want to provide a path forward, we first need to reinstate this, then change the warning, then remove (in 1 year or something). That's how transitions work. HTH. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D140224 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
