Glad we all agree. I opened
https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=30720 to keep track of this.
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Rui Ueyama wrote:
> Agreed. We should define them as aliases to existing options without
> -plugin-opt.
>
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva via cfe-commits
>
Agreed. We should define them as aliases to existing options without
-plugin-opt.
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva via cfe-commits <
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Nice to see this land!
>
> One nit:
> Currently, doesn't LLD/ELF ignore -plugin-opt? That will mean that if a
> user
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Teresa Johnson
wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Rafael Espíndola <
> rafael.espind...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 16 October 2016 at 22:13, Davide Italiano wrote:
>> > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva
>> wrote:
>> >> Nice to see this land!
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Rafael Espíndola <
rafael.espind...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 October 2016 at 22:13, Davide Italiano wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva
> wrote:
> >> Nice to see this land!
> >>
> >> One nit:
> >> Currently, doesn't LLD/ELF ignore -plugin-opt?
On 16 October 2016 at 22:13, Davide Italiano wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva wrote:
>> Nice to see this land!
>>
>> One nit:
>> Currently, doesn't LLD/ELF ignore -plugin-opt? That will mean that if a user
>> uses the "gold syntax" then LLD will silently ignore it, which isn't
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 PM, Sean Silva wrote:
> Nice to see this land!
>
> One nit:
> Currently, doesn't LLD/ELF ignore -plugin-opt? That will mean that if a user
> uses the "gold syntax" then LLD will silently ignore it, which isn't good.
> At the very least, can we issue an error if we see
Nice to see this land!
One nit:
Currently, doesn't LLD/ELF ignore -plugin-opt? That will mean that if a
user uses the "gold syntax" then LLD will silently ignore it, which isn't
good. At the very least, can we issue an error if we see `-plugin-opt
jobs=N` and suggest the LLD spelling?
Or maybe ju
Author: davide
Date: Thu Oct 13 12:42:38 2016
New Revision: 284137
URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=284137&view=rev
Log:
[ThinLTO] Update doc to include lld (now supported).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D25537
Modified:
cfe/trunk/docs/ThinLTO.rst
Modified: cf