dexonsmith added a comment. In D158137#4597565 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137#4597565>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D158137#4597491 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137#4597491>, @dexonsmith > wrote: > >> In D158137#4597009 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137#4597009>, @MaskRay >> wrote: >> >>> In D158137#4596948 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137#4596948>, @dexonsmith >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Can you explain the downside of leaving behind an alias? >>> >>> Two minor ones. (a) Existing `-Wno-overriding-t-option` will not notice >>> that they need to migrate and (b) Clang has accrued tiny tech debt. >>> If we eventually remove `-Wno-overriding-t-option` for tidiness, we will >>> have to break `-Werror -Wno-overriding-t-option` users. >> >> I guess it's not clear to me we'd need to remove the alias. The usual policy >> (I think?) is that clang driver options don't disappear. It seems like a >> small piece of debt to maintain the extra alias in this case, and if it's >> kept, then users don't actually need to migrate. And then you can feel safe >> updating Darwin.cpp as well. > > `-W*` options are different from regular driver options in that > `-Wunknown-unknown-unknown` leads to a warning instead of an error, while a > regular unrecognized driver option leads to an error. > We deprecate driver options and make use of them warnings, and newer Clang > generally emits more warnings. These would break `-Werror` users as well, but > we still do them anyway if reasonable. > > I understand that it is a small piece of debt, but my point is that we don't > need the debt. Okay, fine by me if others are happy! Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D158137 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
