[llvm] r351038 - Add support for prefix-only CLI options

[Joel E. Denny via llvm-commits]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019, 5:51 PM Thomas Preud'homme <thomasp at graphcore.ai
wrote:

> Hi Joel,
>
> From: "Joel E. Denny" <jdenny.ornl at gmail.com>
> Date: Tuesday, 22 January 2019 at 22:23
> To: Thomas Preud'homme <thomasp at graphcore.ai>
> Cc: LLVM Commits <llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org>, "paul.robinson at sony.com" <
> paul.robinson at sony.com>
> Subject: Re: [llvm] r351038 - Add support for prefix-only CLI options
>
> > Hi Thomas, Paul,
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 1:14 PM Thomas Preud'homme via llvm-commits
> <mailto:llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> > Author: thopre
> > Date: Mon Jan 14 01:28:53 2019
> > New Revision: 351038
> >
> > URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=351038&view=rev
> > Log:
> > Add support for prefix-only CLI options
> >
> > Summary:
> > Add support for options that always prefix their value, giving an error
> > if the value is in the next argument or if the option is given a value
> > assignment (ie. opt=val). This is the desired behavior for the -D option
> > of FileCheck for instance.
> >
> > Copyright:
> > - Linaro (changes in version 2 of revision D55940)
> > - GraphCore (changes in later versions and introduced when creating
> >   D56549)
> >
> > That copyright notice wasn't there when we reviewed.  Likewise for
> D55940.
> >
> > Was that an accident, or is this something people need to do now
> sometimes?  I don't know whether it has any legal significance.
> >
>
> My apologies, I didn't realize I needed another round of review for that
> copyright information. My employment changed between the start of the
> review and the patch being approved. I included the information about which
> part of the code is under which copyright because the commit only includes
> my current email and thus does not mention my previous employer. This is
> akin to contributing a patch under one employer and another patch modifying
> the same area of code under a different one. I will not do this for patches
> written under a single copyright as is the case for the patch in
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D56789.


> Please let me know if this poses any problem.
>

I wouldn't know, and I didn't mean to suggest it's a problem.  I asked
because I've not seen that before and wondered about the reason and
implications.  Thanks for explaining.

Joel


> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>
> ** We have updated our privacy policy, which contains important
> information about how we collect and process your personal data. To read
> the policy, please click here<http://www.graphcore.ai/privacy> **
>
> This email and its attachments are intended solely for the addressed
> recipients and may contain confidential or legally privileged information.
> If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute or
> disseminate this email in any way; to do so may be unlawful.
>
> Any personal data/special category personal data herein are processed in
> accordance with UK data protection legislation.
> All associated feasible security measures are in place. Further details
> are available from the Privacy Notice on the website and/or from the
> Company.
>
> Graphcore Limited (registered in England and Wales with registration
> number 10185006) is registered at 107 Cheapside, London, UK, EC2V 6DN.
> This message was scanned for viruses upon transmission. However Graphcore
> accepts no liability for any such transmission.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20190122/f46aa530/attachment.html>