[PATCH] D58033: Add option for emitting dbg info for call sites

[Paul Robinson via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

probinson added a comment.

I guess I'm not clear what your final goal is for the option.  Keep it, even though GCC doesn't have one like it?  Eliminate it?  Please clearly state what you intend to have in the end, and what you might have in the short term in case that is different.



================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/CC1Options.td:362
     HelpText<"Use public LTO visibility for classes in std and stdext namespaces">;
+def emit_param_entry_values_cc1:
+    Flag<["-"], "emit-param-entry-values-cc1">,
----------------
I think this is not necessary, see comment on Options.td.


================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Options.td:919
   HelpText<"Do not use jump tables for lowering switches">;
+def emit_param_entry_values : Joined<["-"], "femit-param-entry-values">,
+                       Group<f_clang_Group>,
----------------
djtodoro wrote:
> aprantl wrote:
> > I assume that this is the same -f option that GCC uses?
> Actually in GCC production of call_site and call_site_parameters debug info is enabled by default.
> Production of entry_values is implemented on top of variable's value tracking system and there is no particular option just for entry_values.
> 
> Basically, we introduce this option as experimental one. As soon as we test everything we should get rid of this or turn it ON by default (and maybe add '-fno-emit-param-entry-values' in order to have an option for disabling the functionality). That will be ideal scenario.
By convention, the name of the option should start with 'f' and match the option spelling (with hyphens changed to underscore).


================
Comment at: include/clang/Driver/Options.td:921
+                       Group<f_clang_Group>,
+                       Flags<[CC1Option]>,
+                       HelpText<"Enables debug info about call site and call site parameters">;
----------------
I believe that by marking this with `[CC1Option]` cc1 will automatically understand it and you won't need to define a separate option in CC1Options.td.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D58033/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D58033