On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote:
> - I would personally prefer the intent to be explicit. The more I think > about it the less I like one flag activating N different kinds of PGO based > on the file type. It makes it too easy to typo a filename and get different > (unexpected) behavior. OK, so you'd prefer a family of flags then? -fprofile-<kind>-use=... This would imply a slight asymmetry in flag names with the instrumentation based profiles, unless we renamed -fprofile-generate to something like -fprofile-instr-generate. But I don't think we need to be that fussy. > - I dislike having flag A which changes flag B's behavior where possible to > avoid. It makes it much harder to manipulate things through append-based > build systems' flag management. My inclination was to simply use -fprofile-generate and -fprofile-use. The -fprofile-use flag would have file type auto-detection. I agree that we could have scenarios where -fprofile-use surprises with unexpected behaviour. In which case, -fprofile-<kind>-use or -fprofile-use=:kind:filename (or some other variant) could be used. Diego. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
