ChuanqiXu marked an inline comment as done. ChuanqiXu added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang/tools/clang-scan-deps/ClangScanDeps.cpp:197 +llvm::cl::opt<std::string> P1689TargetedCommand( + "p1689-targeted-command", llvm::cl::Optional, + llvm::cl::desc("Only supported for P1689, the targeted command of which " ---------------- ben.boeckel wrote: > ChuanqiXu wrote: > > ben.boeckel wrote: > > > Can this be something like `--` so that I don't have to figure out how to > > > quote the thing (for the shell and whatever parsing Clang does > > > internally)? > > Yeah, it can. Both `-` and `--` are accepted. I've updated the test to > > disambiguate. > I don't mean the flag using `--` as a prefix. I don't care about that. What I > *do* care about is having to quote everything I'd give to `clang` here. I'd > vastly prefer something like: > > ``` > clang-scan-deps -p1689-targeted-file-name=… -p1689-use-command -- -flags > --for ---clang --go --here > ``` I got your point. But I prefer the current style if it won't be a problem for you to quote the options. In my imagination, it would be easier for the build systems to quote the flags than we synthesis things here. I guess there should already be one existing command line in the build system. And I feel like the current style may be more convenient and friendly for other tools to use. Could you try to use the current style? CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137534 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits