compnerd wrote:
@steakhal bleh, is the "New Features" a sub item of "Static Analyzer"?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
steakhal wrote:
> @steakhal bleh, is the "New Features" a sub item of "Static Analyzer"?
Ah you are right. Its at the right place. Nvm.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://li
steakhal wrote:
Hi, I'm not sure where to move your addition in the ReleaseNotes, but I'm
pretty sure it shouldn't be in the Static Analyzer section.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.
https://github.com/compnerd closed
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
https://github.com/efriedma-quic commented:
Please add HelpText for the new option. Maybe mention in that text that it
currently doesn't affect linking.
Please add a release note.
Otherwise looks fine.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
__
compnerd wrote:
I can see that as being useful certainly. `-fblocks` could add
`-lBlocksRuntime`. However, I think that the behaviour change with
`-static-libclosure` would then impact both code generation (on Windows) and
the linking, which would give the correct desired behaviour. Where as,
efriedma-quic wrote:
Do you anticipate the clang driver ever adding the libclosure runtime to the
link line automatically? If we do, would this flag control the behavior of
that?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
___
cfe-commits maili
compnerd wrote:
The other way works with warnings and some performance loss and code bloat
(linking code designed for DLL as static).
So far I've always mandated dynamic linking for BlocksRuntime on Windows within
the Swift toolchain and by the Swift toolchain.
You are correct that the `-stat
efriedma-quic wrote:
I thought the Windows linker actually can handle statically linking dllimported
symbols this (maybe with a warning?).
The other options you mention (`-static-libgcc` etc.) affect the link line; it
looks like this patch doesn't change the way linking works? Is that expecte
https://github.com/compnerd updated
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
>From 33f361fda5b27964037c061d7944c01d3891d914 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Saleem Abdulrasool
Date: Sat, 1 Feb 2025 15:04:04 -0800
Subject: [PATCH] CodeGen: support static linking for libclosure
When buildi
llvmbot wrote:
@llvm/pr-subscribers-clang-driver
Author: Saleem Abdulrasool (compnerd)
Changes
When building on Windows, dealing with the BlocksRuntime is slightly more
complicated. As we are not guaranteed a formward declaration for the blocks
runtime ABI symbols, we may generate the de
https://github.com/compnerd created
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/125384
When building on Windows, dealing with the BlocksRuntime is slightly more
complicated. As we are not guaranteed a formward declaration for the blocks
runtime ABI symbols, we may generate the declarations for t
12 matches
Mail list logo
