================ @@ -1834,6 +1834,14 @@ bool CompilerInvocation::ParseCodeGenArgs(CodeGenOptions &Opts, ArgList &Args, Opts.setInlining(CodeGenOptions::NormalInlining); } + // If we have specified -Og and have not explicitly set -fno-extend-lifetimes, + // then default to -fextend-lifetimes. + if (Arg *A = Args.getLastArg(options::OPT_O_Group); + A && A->containsValue("g")) { ---------------- SLTozer wrote:
Is there an advantage to having it passed through the driver? I ask mainly because I see `-fextend-lifetimes` as being a feature of `-Og` optimization, and if you invoke `clang -cc1 -Og` directly then you'd expect/hope that the optimization behaviour would be the same as `clang -Og` - I'm not too familiar with expected Clang behaviour though, so if this is quite normal for driver/frontend behaviour then I'm fine to switch it. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/118026 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits