[PATCH] gcc compatibility: silent -finline-limit=1234 & -finline-limit

[Alp Toker]

On 05/07/2014 00:44, Arthur Marble wrote:
> Hello,
>
> That makes sense to me for other flags but in this case isn't clang 
> not planning to support inline functions? If it is not then should we 
> have the compiler spit out a message about how this is not used?

Hi Arthur,

I believe the -finline-limit= warning is related to inliner decisions in 
the code generator backend, not the GNU nested function language extension.

Alp.

>
> Regards,
> Arthur
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com 
> <mailto:alp at nuanti.com>> wrote:
>
>     Patch?
>
>     I investigated this flag too a while back and reached the
>     conclusion it's only interesting to support if we actually hook it
>     into the backend.
>
>     Otherwise it's unfair to users to silently claim support for an
>     option that has semantic significance, only to go and ignore it.
>     Especially if it's only to unblock a dozen packages it'd be a shame.
>
>     On the plus side, it was really rewarding to implement a
>     GCC-compatible -Wframe-larger-than= a few weeks ago so I *do*
>     think there's value in providing real implementations of these
>     flags because it informs decisions we need to make about
>     backend/frontend layering.
>
>     Alp.
>
>
>     On 04/07/2014 18:15, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
>
>         adding cfe-commits
>
>         http://reviews.llvm.org/D4376
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         cfe-commits mailing list
>         cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu <mailto:cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu>
>         http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
>
>
>     -- 
>     http://www.nuanti.com
>     the browser experts
>
>

-- 
http://www.nuanti.com
the browser experts