aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52857#1258893, @steveire wrote:
> - The scripts will continue to work at least until `set output` is removed, > which is not going to happen soon. Certainly, but given that deprecation implies eventual removal, people are still being asked to update their scripts. What's more, given that clang-output has no real documentation to speak of, how will users even *know* to update their scripts? Rather than invent ways to address these concerns, I'm much more in favor of making the feature work using a backwards compatible syntax. Then no one has to update their scripts to get identical functionality. > - A comma-delimited list of options means that if I have `foo, bar, bat` > enabled and want to add `bang`, I need to `set output foo, bar, bat, bang`. > Or alternatively if I want to remove `bat`, I need to write out all the > others. I don't think that's suitable. Correct -- if you want different output because new options are available, you need to opt into it. I'm not certain what the issue is with that; can you expound on your concerns? From what I'm seeing in the patch, it looks like you want user to write: set dump-output set diag-output match foo(bar(baz())) and I'm asking for it to instead be: set output dump, diag match foo(bar(baz())) Functionally, I believe these are equivalent. However, I think the latter is more clear for users as it implies a set of output options rather than leaving you to wonder whether `set blah-output` options are mutually exclusive or not. Repository: rCTE Clang Tools Extra https://reviews.llvm.org/D52857 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
