iains wrote: > > > @iains @dwblaikie Understood. And I thought the major problem is that > > > there are a lot flags from clang modules. And it is indeed confusing. But > > > given we have to introduce new flags in this case, probably we can only > > > try to make it more clear by better documents. > > > > > > So you do not think it possible to restrict the new flag to be "internal" > > (i.e. cc1-only) and to put some _temporary_ driver processing to handle > > that? (I agree that this is an unusual mechanism, but the idea is to > > recognise that the driver-side processing is only expected to me temporary). > > I have no idea how can we make that. We still need the users to provide > something to enable reduced BMI. And I think it is symmetric to a new flag.
What I mean is that (a) we need the internal 'cc1' flag permanently; but (b) we do not expect to need a user-facing driver flag permanently. and (c) We want to allow users to try this out. I am suggesting we could say "to try this out use -Xclang -fmodules-reduced-bmi" and have _temporary_ code in the driver to deal with the changes needed to phasing. If this is not possible. then I suppose I am a bit sad that we keep saying 'there are too many modules options' - but yet still add more. however - we need to make progress, so if the suggestion here is really a non-starter .. then such is life. Perhaps the second suggestion (-fexperimental-xxxxx options) could be discussed at the project level. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/85050 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
