[PATCH] D27082: [LTO] Reject modules without datalayout

[Mehdi Amini via llvm-commits]

It changes the moment we emit the error (and I agree that the earlier the better usually, even though there may be cases where you consider a module but don’t include it in the link for instance), but I’m not sure why you think that the current error does not easily allow to diagnose which file has the problem, since it returns an error on the call to `LTO.add(InputFile)` ?


> On Dec 13, 2016, at 8:43 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote:
> 
> It could be more useful to do this in InputFile::create, that way the client can easily diagnose which file has the problem.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 
> On Dec 13, 2016 8:36 PM, "Mehdi AMINI via Phabricator" <reviews at reviews.llvm.org <mailto:reviews at reviews.llvm.org>> wrote:
> mehdi_amini accepted this revision.
> mehdi_amini added a comment.
> This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
> 
> LGTM.
> 
> 
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D27082 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D27082>
> 
> 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20161213/fa39a52d/attachment.html>