[PATCH] D103125: [Clang][WIP] Allow renaming of "clang"

[Paul Robinson via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

probinson added a comment.

In D103125#2781239 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103125#2781239>, @jhenderson wrote:

> In D103125#2780936 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D103125#2780936>, @dblaikie wrote:
>
>> Can't say I'm super enthusiastic about this (I assume the build already supports prefixes and suffixes, which I'd hope would be adequate - but presumably are not for your use case), though there's some, I think, related prior art: Sony folks (@probinson @jhenderson) have (or had at some point) different C++ language standard/version defaults than upstream and have maintained/made changes to upstream test cases that assume the upstream default version to not make that assumption (to have it explicit). So having some costs/changes upstream for downstream differences like this seems at least vaguely plausible to me.
>
> We do our executable renaming post build and lit testing. We do the renaming to nearly all our built tools, not just the clang (clang++ etc) family, e.g. the LLVM binutils like llvm-objdump becomes xxx-llvm-objdump, so unless the scope of this increases to include those, I'm not sure how useful it would be to us (and expanding the scope to other tools becomes problematic because there isn't a `%clang` equivalent for testing purposes for those other tools, so presumably would require significantly more updates?).
>
> @probinson may have more thoughts on this though.

No, you've stated my thoughts almost exactly.  If this became a generic prefixing thing, we'd want to apply it to clang, llvm tools, lld, etc.

Re the `%clang` equivalent, actually there is already tool-name substitution without the % in order to add the build-dir path to the tool name, so I *think* that can be made to work without having to update every test in existence.  But, if the prefix isn't added universally, it's not really useful for us.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D103125/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D103125