dblaikie added a comment.
Thanks! - though on reflection I'm going to invoke @echristo again about the
naming. It's unfortunately a bit backwards that the pre-standard flag is
-gsplit-dwarf and what we're proposing as the standard flag is -fdwarf-fission,
when the DWARF standard doesn't use the word "Fission" at all (only "split
DWARF").
Maybe it'd be easy enough/better to add the "=single" suffix to the existing
"-gsplit-dwarf"? (as much as I'm still a bit confused by which debug options
use a '-g' and which ones use a '-f', etc).
Really sorry to go back/forth/around about on this, George.
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:2999-3001
+ StringRef Value = A->getOption().matches(options::OPT_fdwarf_fission_EQ)
+ ? A->getValue()
+ : "split";
----------------
Rather than creating a string in the case where there's no need for string
matching/parsing, perhaps that could be avoided?
if (!A->getOption().matches(options::OPT_fdwarf_fission_EQ))
return DwarfFissionKind::Split;
StringRef Value = A->getValue();
if (Value == "split")
...
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:3010-3011
+ }
+ if (ArgIndex)
+ *ArgIndex = 0;
+ return DwarfFissionKind::None;
----------------
I'd probably either accept this as a precondition (assert(!ArgIndex || ArgIndex
== 0)) or do this bit at the start of the function rather than the end here, to
make it simpler/clearer that all paths assign some value to ArgIndex before
exit of the function (even though that does mean checking/assigning ArgIndex
unnecessarily in the case where the argument is given, etc)
================
Comment at: lib/Driver/ToolChains/Clang.cpp:5889
const llvm::Triple &T = getToolChain().getTriple();
- if (Args.hasArg(options::OPT_gsplit_dwarf) &&
+ if ((getDebugFissionKind(D, Args) == DwarfFissionKind::Split) &&
(T.isOSLinux() || T.isOSFuchsia())) {
----------------
Could having more than one call to getDebugFissionKind lead to the error
message (for -fdwarf-fission=garbage) being printed multiple times? Or is this
call on a distinct/mutually exclusive codepath to the other?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D52296
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
