dblaikie added a comment.

> probably too much, but then I wonder "how do we make Fortify work?".

(I'm still sort of on the side of "if the compile-time costs to get more 
verbose diagnostics is high, we could have a low-quality default-on diagnostic 
and it could mention/recommend a different/high quality/compile-time costly 
diagnostic" so for code bases like the Linux kernel that rely on this sort of 
thing a lot, with lots of always_inlining, etc, they can tradeoff toward the 
better diagnostic experience and codebases that don't use these features much 
they can still get the checking for when it does come up, but at some cost of 
quality/awkwardness in needing to rebuild with other flags)

But if folks decided some more invasive tracking was worth implementing 
(alongside the debug info codepath that already exists but is perhaps too slow 
to be always on) I wouldn't get up on a soapbox to strenuously object - I just 
think it's a bit unfortunate to build a duplicate thing, but maybe necessary.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D141451/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D141451

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to