mstorsjo added a comment. In D132444#3742295 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D132444#3742295>, @thakis wrote:
> Do we have precedent for "platform" for this? For fuse-ld=, one is supposed > to use `-fuse-ld=` (without anything after the `=`) to get the default ld. > That's not great (...but it can't collide with actual linker names, i > suppose). > > Using "platform" (or any other self-descriptive name) for this seems easier > to understand than passing an empty value. But it'd be nice if we could use > this consistently in our various flags. Yes, `"platform"` is an existing option handled in a bunch of places already - see e.g. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/clang/lib/Driver/ToolChain.cpp#L832-L838. It's just that these cases hadn't been updated to take it into account. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D132444/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D132444 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
