awarzynski added a comment. Thank you all for your input. Let me summarize.
**SUGGESTION 1** Tweak the wording to clarify that it is Clang-specific. That's a good compromise IMO. It highlights that the described semantics apply to Clang only. And I'm not aware of any other way to achieve this right now (i.e. without intrusive refactoring). **SUGGESTION 2:** The description of `-I` in `-help` and `ClangCommandLineReference.rst` are made independent of each other (so that `-help` can be tweaked to suit both Clang and Flang). `ClangCommandLineReference.rst` is basically generated from `Options.td`, so any modification to Options.td will affect the user-facing docs. From docs/CMakeLists.txt: gen_rst_file_from_td(ClangCommandLineReference.rst -gen-opt-docs ../include/clang/Driver/ClangOptionDocs.td docs-clang-html) From ClangOptionDocs.td: include "Options.td" I don't see any straightforward solution here that would allow different descriptions for `-I` in `-help` and in the user-facing docs. Not without completely refactoring how ClangCommandLineReference.rst is produced. **SUGGESTION 3** Ideally, we'd have one help message for `-I` for Clang and another one for Flang (in `Options.td`). Unfortunately, AFAIK, there is no easy way to tweak the output of `-help`. The current API is quite inflexible in this respect. This was brought-up at some point last year [1][2]. From the limited feedback I'm guessing that that would also require a major refactor. **SUGGESTION 4** We add a new definition for `-I` for Flang, e.g. `def I_for_flang`. This solves the problem, but adds yet another option definition. Note that `libclangDriver` creates only one global list of all options: - https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/80dee7965dffdfb866afa9d74f3a4a97453708b2/clang/lib/Driver/DriverOptions.cpp#L42-L55 - https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/80dee7965dffdfb866afa9d74f3a4a97453708b2/clang/include/clang/Driver/Options.h#L43-L52 This means that both Flang and Clang will have access to `OPT_I` and `OPT_I_for_flang` (C++ options generated from Options.td). These can be hidden from the user, but will still be available. Also, this would mean the massive table of `libclangDriver` options keeps growing. Is that how we should proceed moving forward when option names are identical for Clang and Flang, but the semantics are slightly different? [1] https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143745.html [2] https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2020-October/066953.html **Few final points** I would really appreciate a compromise that does not require any major refactoring in Clang at this stage. We are ready to add `-I`to Flang and we have a bunch of patches almost ready that depend on it. I appreciate that this is just one option, but we are likely to experience more inconsistencies like this in the near future. Also, for reference, output from `gcc` and `gfortran`: -I <dir> Add <dir> to the end of the main include path. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D94169/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D94169 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
