ldionne marked an inline comment as done. ldionne added a comment. Thanks @mstorsjo! Regarding `_LIBCPP_EXPERIMENTAL_FUNC_VIS`, yes I think it would make sense to use a different visibility macro for symbols that we know are provided only as part of a static library. I would not call it `_LIBCPP_EXPERIMENTAL_FUNC_VIS` though, I would call it something like `_LIBCPP_STATIC_LIBRARY_FUNC_VIS` or something like that.
================ Comment at: libcxx/utils/libcxx/test/params.py:68 + if hasCompileFlag(cfg, '-funstable') and False: # TODO: Enable this once the design of `-funstable` is finished + return '-funstable' + else: ---------------- mstorsjo wrote: > Actually, I'm not entirely convinced that this is a good way to handle > linking against the library for tests. > > When building tests, we don't rely on the compiler to implicitly link in our > C++ library, but we link with `-nostdlib++` (or `-nodefaultlibs`) and > explicitly tell the compiler how to link in specifically the C++ library > we've just built (in the test config files). > > So in general, if linking with `-nostdlib++ -fexperimental-library` I kinda > wouldn't expect the compiler driver to link against the library at all? It's > kinda the same as if you'd do `-stdlib=libstdc++ -fexperimental-library` - we > can't have that add `-lc++experimental`, as that only makes sense as long as > we have `-stdlib=libc++`. So subsequently I don't think the compiler driver > should be adding `-lc++experimental` as long as we're passing `-nostdlib++` > either? > > But if libc++experimental is built unconditionally, wouldn't it be simplest > to just always link against it in the test config files (just like how we > force it to link against specifically the just-built libc++.a) - that would > make it much more symmetrcial to how we handle the main `-lc++`? Interesting point. It does mean that we can never rely on `-funstable` adding `-lc++experimental` from our test suite -- I think that's OK. However, I'd like to avoid linking against `-lc++experimental` in the base test configuration, simply because the base test configuration should mirror the minimal way of invoking Clang to use libc++. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D128927/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D128927 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
