hans added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30239#683697, @inglorion wrote:
> @mehdi_amini: > > > Is clang-cl using lld as default? How is the switch done? Ideally we should > > have a nice error message from the driver if -flto is used without lld. > > I believe we use link.exe by default. You can use lld by passing -fuse-ld=lld > to the compiler. > > I can add an error message when -flto is used without -fuse-ld=lld at least > for the case when linking is actually performed. Of course, it's possible to > invoke clang-cl without it doing any linking. If you're only compiling, it's > perfectly valid to use -flto without -fuse-ld=lld. That sounds like a good idea. ================ Comment at: test/Driver/cl-lto.c:2 +// -flto causes a switch to llvm-bc object files. +// RUN: %clang_cl -ccc-print-phases -c -flto -- %s 2> %t +// RUN: FileCheck -check-prefix=CHECK-COMPILE-ACTIONS < %t %s ---------------- This test and the other file look like they're doing the same as test/Driver/(thin)lto.c. I don't think we need to test these separately for clang-cl; it should be enough with a simple test in test/Driver/cl-options.c to check that they're exposed and that -### looks right for them. https://reviews.llvm.org/D30239 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
