Inserting arbitrary feature macros into CMake should not be a supported scenario because it results is macros, such as this one, which are seemingly dead.
/Eric On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonat...@codesourcery.com > wrote: > > > On 2/24/17 1:30 PM, Eric Fiselier via Phabricator wrote: > >> EricWF added a comment. >> >> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30339#685921, @jroelofs wrote: >> >> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D30339#685919, @rmaprath wrote: >>> >>> Perhaps change `config.h` and remove the definition there and adjust >>>> other places accordingly? >>>> >>>> The current form is very easy to trip over. >>>> >>> >>> Eric's point is that LIBCXXABI_BAREMETAL is a 0/1 flag, not a >>> defined/not-defined flag. Please don't change from one form to the other... >>> it's disruptive to build systems. >>> >> >> I actually think it's better to maintain consistency between libc++ and >> libc++abi. And libc++ never uses 0/1 flags. So I would rather see a fix in >> `config.h`. >> >> Frankly I don't care that it is disruptive to build systems unless it's >> the build system owned by LLVM. >> > > What I really care about is the interface between the build system owned > by LLVM, and the one driving it. > > > Jon > > > >> >> Repository: >> rL LLVM >> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D30339 >> >> >> >> > -- > Jon Roelofs > jonat...@codesourcery.com > CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
