On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 08:48:10AM -0700, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Yes.
>
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 5:35 AM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Kostya Serebryany <k...@google.com> wrote:
> >> One thing I overlooked before.
> >> In the gcc patch we are using -fasan flag name, while clang uses
> >> -f[no-]address-sanitizer
> >> (it used to be -fasan in early patches, but was renamed before submitting
> >> to
> >> trunk).
> >> Do we want to be flag-compatible with clang (I'd say yes)?
> >
> > I agree.
I agree too, but I wouldn't rename -fdump-tree-asan{,0} etc., just the main
switch.
Jakub
