ilya-biryukov wrote: Sorry for jumping in late.
I think Erich is on point that having a flag that controls an assertion is a bit of a red flag as we are mixing build configuration and runtime configuration. It is at least unusual and may cause confusion. After thinking about this a bit more, should we maybe go all-in on one of the approaches? - either use build configuration: add a new build flag that controls this assertion. Only assert when assertions are enabled and the new build flag is defined. - or use runtime configure always, e.g. add diagnostics for names that can't be demangled. It should make finding those issues much easier (one can run the compiler to produce a list of names that can't be demangled with locations pointing at code that helps to identify where those names come from). I would probably vouch for the second approach. The only downside that I see is that we have to explore the warning flag to users (right?) and this is something that should be internal (-cc1). What do people think of that proposal? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/111391 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
