jlebar added inline comments. ================ Comment at: lib/Driver/Driver.cpp:652 @@ -640,3 +651,3 @@ SmallVector<std::pair<int, const Command *>, 4> FailingCommands; - C.ExecuteJobs(C.getJobs(), FailingCommands); + C.ExecuteJobs(C.getJobs(), /* StopOnFailure = */ false, FailingCommands); ---------------- tra wrote: > jlebar wrote: > > tra wrote: > > > As far as I can tell, we don't do anything interesting if we've detected > > > that *any* of the commands have failed. That suggests that doing anything > > > beyond the first failing command does not do us any good. That would > > > suggest that we may really want StopOnFailure=true here. > > > > > > 'false' would preserve current behavior, though. > > > > > > In either case I'm OK with a constant here. > > Sorry, I think I'm misunderstanding something. Would you mind rephrasing > > this? > > > > > As far as I can tell, we don't do anything interesting if we've detected > > > that *any* of the commands have failed. That suggests that doing > > > anything beyond the first failing command does not do us any good. > > > > The scenario I thought this change applied to was: > > > > External tool crashes during a call to ExecuteJobs() (not this one). We > > now want to output preprocessed inputs, so we run this code, which again > > calls ExecuteJobs(), but these jobs only run the preprocessor on the inputs. > > > > Now suppose one of those preprocessor jobs fails. Maybe it has a bad > > preprocessor directive, or maybe #error would be enough. It seems to me in > > this case that we should continue running the other preprocessor jobs, so > > we dump as much debug info as we can. > > > > Note that if the StopOnFailure flag is false, afaict it's entirely possible > > for us to have two inputs, one of which has a pp error and the other of > > which causes a compiler crash -- if we stopped on failure here, we wouldn't > > output anything for the second input, which is the one we're interested in. > > > > Sorry again, I'm sure I'm missing something. > Look at the lines below. If there are any failing commands we just report an > error and return. > Even if there are multiple preprocessor jobs and if some of them succeed, we > would not get to use their output. > Oh.
Thanks. :) http://reviews.llvm.org/D16514 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
