MaskRay wrote: > > > @MaskRay the reason for adding this option is that gcc supports it. > > > please refer to [godbolt.org/z/54sE6zTa1](https://godbolt.org/z/54sE6zTa1) > > > > > > This doesn't answer my question. GCC has a lot of options that Clang > > doesn't support. An option supported by GCC does not mean that Clang needs > > to support it. This option has perfect replacement, which makes it even > > questionable (since to the best of my knowledge `-export-dynamic` driver > > option is not used) See my previous comment: > > > GCC's default spec file for Linux does not say how -export-dynamic > > > translates to ld -export-dynamic. > > > I think ld --export-dynamic is exclusively caused by -Wl,--export-dynamic > > > or -rdynamic. > > > Do you have any example of gcc -export-dynamic uses? > > This is historically undocumented option. and yes, it can be repalced by > -rdynamic. See [PR47390](https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47390). > The purpose of this pull request is to ensure consistency between the two > compilers. If you think it's unnecessary to support it, I'm fine with it. : )
Thank you for digging this up. So `-export-dynamic` is the only special `-exxx` option GCC supports. Except this gawk issue (2011) which likely gets fixed long ago, `gcc -export-dynamic` seems to have no use. This doesn't justify driver adding an option (that we know is not a good thing) special case. Note that `clang -e xxx` or `clang -exxx` did not work before 2020-07, so even all `-exxx` `-e xxx` all probably rarely used. We should consider https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72804#issuecomment-1820321163 https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72781 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
