[llvm-dev] Migrating llvm-objdump and a few other common binutils replacements away from llvm::cl.

[James Henderson via llvm-dev]

I like this proposal, personally. I'm not too familiar with the
command-line stuff, but my experience is that seeing options relating to
the LLVM backend in binary dumping and manipulation tools seems a bit weird.

This might be out of scope, but specifically regarding llvm-objdump, I
noted a number of places where the options is MachO specific, and I was
wondering if we could find a way to keep those options separate from the
others, to make it more friendly to those who care about only ELF, for
example.

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 09:02, Kristina Brooks via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Just wanted to ask, does anyone have any objections to me working on
> refactoring
> a few common LLVM tools (objdump, nm, strings, readobj) to use the new
> TableGen
> based option interfaces and submitting a diff for each one? Just wondering
> if
> anyone else is currently working on this and so I don't end up doing
> redundant
> work as there were a few discussions regarding `llvm::cl` and I think
> there is
> a general agreement in that that should be something for LLVM parts to
> expose
> various tinkering options, not for handling regular tools.
>
> Especially considering there were a few points raised regarding threading
> and
> the global state of these options, I think this is one of the few places I
> can
> be useful and address part of the problem by moving those interfaces.
>
> I also want to improve the quality of help for those tools overall to
> match their
> GNU counterparts more closely and possibly add options for colorful output
> where
> it makes sense and makes it easier to read things like section dumps of
> ELF objects
> for example.
>
> Is anyone currently working on this and if not, how does the overall
> community
> feel about me approaching those things with differentials on tool-by-tool
> basis
> just to improve the overall experience of using those tools (instead of
> getting
> a lot of not-so-relevant information from `llvm-objdump --help`)?
>
> Let me know what you think and if someone is already working on some or
> all o
> these tools in which case I could perhaps focus on others?
>
> Thank you for your time reading this.
> - Kristina
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20181031/45072178/attachment.html>