dexonsmith added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/lib/Tooling/DependencyScanning/DependencyScanningTool.cpp:41
for (const PrebuiltModuleDep &PMD : PrebuiltModuleDeps) {
- Args.push_back("-fmodule-file=" + PMD.ModuleName + "=" + PMD.PCMFile);
+ Args.push_back("-fmodule-file=" + PMD.PCMFile);
Args.push_back("-fmodule-map-file=" + PMD.ModuleMapFile);
----------------
jansvoboda11 wrote:
> dexonsmith wrote:
> > Why drop the `<name>=` argument? Isn't it better to keep that information,
> > rather than forcing the reader to crack open the file to know what's inside?
> I think it's nice to be consistent. We already pass PCM files in the
> `-fmodule-file=<path>` form for:
> * all dependencies when precompiling a module,
> * non-PCH dependencies dependencies when compiling a TU.
> The `-fmodule-file=<name>=<path>` format is handled lazily (done via header
> search), which might be less efficient (see
> 0f99d6a4413e3da6ec242c0ab715d6699045dea8). We don't need laziness, since we
> know we'll need to open the file anyways.
>
> I'm open to revising this decision later as part of performance tuning, but
> for now, I'd like this to be consistent across the board.
>
> Bonus points: it forces me to fix a Clang bug.
>
> WDYT?
Okay, SGTM.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111560/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111560
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
