hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment. In D69356#1727381 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356#1727381>, @beanz wrote:
> (1) dead stripping support is useful independent of plugins, so it is > valuable to have that option be separate Okay. >> Just because the current implementation of plug-in support is by disabling >> dead strip does not make it a great reason for "enabling plug-in support" to >> be called `LLVM_NO_DEAD_STRIP`. > > `LLVM_NO_DEAD_STRIP` isn't the implementation of enabling plugin support. Sure, it can be claimed that it merely has high affinity with the implementation of enabling plugin support in terms of linking in its use prior to the subject patch. Adding `LLVM_NO_DEAD_STRIP` back is fine if it is used for something else, although it would help people developing patches understand its use cases better if there was more comments and better documentation. The comments about `LLVM_NO_DEAD_STRIP` that can be seen in the patch context talk a lot about plug-in support, and mentions of other use cases are not really standing out. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69356 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
