In an ideal world yes, but the reality is that many people still use MSBuild, and in that world /MP presumably helps quite a bit. And given that many people already depend on this functionality of cl, it’s a potential showstopper for migrating if we don’t support it. That said, if the benefit isn’t significant that’s a stronger argument for not supporting it imo On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:45 AM Hans Wennborg via Phabricator < revi...@reviews.llvm.org> wrote:
> hans added a comment. > > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52193#1237468, @zturner wrote: > > > What about the timings of clang-cl without /MP? > > > And one using Ninja rather than msbuild. > > I think the real question is whether we want clang and clang-cl to do > this. I'm not sure we do as it adds complexity for solving a problem that's > better solved at the build system level. > > > Repository: > rC Clang > > https://reviews.llvm.org/D52193 > > > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
