phosek added a comment. Herald added a subscriber: dang. In D83154#2134984 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D83154#2134984>, @MaskRay wrote:
> -fdebug-prefix-map does not make sense to me because coverage is not debug > info. > I am on the fence whether we need -fcoverage-prefix-map. I created > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96092 (Should --coverage respect > -ffile-prefix-map?) Looks like GCC has `-fprofile-prefix-path` <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96092#c2> in the queue which is trying to achieve a similar thing. I'd prefer `-fprofile-prefix-map` to be consistent with the existing `-f*-prefix-map` options, both in terms of spelling and usage. I think that `-fprofile-prefix-map` is better than `-fcoverage-prefix-map` because it makes it clear that it applies `-fprofile-*` set of options. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D83154/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D83154 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
