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
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
