[PATCH] Add support for a directory argument to llvm-link

[Rafael Espíndola]

> I meant that I had to use a hack to feed the files to llvm-link (crazy
> escaping monstrosity), not that the use case is a hack.

Well, it is a hack. That is not how we are implementing lto on trunk.

>> llvm-link is just a developer tool. Any use of it for production
>> purposes is an unsupported hack. Which sometimes is the right thing to
>> do, but still a hack and still unsupported.
>
>
> This is a slippery slope. Developer tools exist because they make
> developers' lives easier. Adding features which make developers' lives
> easier is the right thing to do. We have concrete experience showing that
> this sort of feature fits a real use case for the tool and significantly
> simplifies its use; that's enough reason for me to consider it worthwhile to
> have in-tree (especially since it's a very small amount of logic).

By developer tool I mean something that is use for testing llvm or in
the day to day tasks of developing llvm. The use case you list is a
way of implementing LTO which is not how we implement it in tree. I
think any support code for it should be out of tree too.

Cheers,
Rafael