b-sumner added a comment. In D145343#4170305 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D145343#4170305>, @yaxunl wrote:
> In D145343#4170250 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D145343#4170250>, @arsenm wrote: > >> I think exposing whether or not the flag was used is weird/broken, as is >> including _OPTION in the name. Should just define to whether it's enabled or >> not > > I agree. @b-sumner What do you think? I think applications may need to check if CUMode is enabled at compile time and select code based on that. But a concern has been raised about compiling such source with an older compiler which is not setting the macro regardless of whether -mcumode was used. The conservative approach here would be to only define a macro only if -mcumode is used, and define nothing if it is not used. Then, when using an old compiler, the code will assume -mno-cumode which is always fine to do. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D145343/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D145343 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
