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

[Rafael Espíndola]

> By "use case" I meant "feeding a directory of files to llvm-link", not the
> overall script. Feeding a directory of files to llvm-link sounds like a
> perfectly normal thing to do.

For what?

> Besides, making the tool easier to use is not a concession that it should be
> used for production purposes or is supported for production purposes; it's
> just that: making the tool easier to use. Think about it this way: if
> llvm-link were originally written with this behavior, would you be dying to
> rip that functionality out?

Would not be the top of my priorities. But it is not in trunk, so the
burden is on the other side to show that this is a useful thing to
have in a development environment.

> Khilan, sorry for all this crossfire on your first patch. I'd like to see
> another iteration of this patch with the behavior I described:
> "Even better: there is no -dir argument. Positional arguments can be either
> bitcode files, or directories. If a positional argument happens to be a
> directory, it is scanned for bitcode files, which are added to the list of
> inputs. It is not an error to specify a directory that contains no bitcode
> files."
> Actually, I'd prefer an incremental step of just detecting directory
> arguments and adding all files in the directory (a future patch can filter
> bitcode files if that feature seems useful).
>

Cheers,
Rafael