search for: drctve

...ed linker options to object files" is too weak as a specification. You need to clearly define a list of options that will be supported by linkers with their clear semantics. (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design failure that a COFF file contains just a single string i...

...would be interesting. I can see -u being useful as well, but the point is that we can slowly grow the support after consideration by delaying the validation of the options. (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the > same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains > linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command > line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly > especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design > failure that a COFF file contains ju...

...I can see -u being useful as well, but the point is that we can slowly grow > the support after consideration by delaying the validation of the options. > >> (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the >> same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains >> linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command >> line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly >> especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design >> failure that a COFF...

...ng useful as well, but the point is that we can slowly grow >> the support after consideration by delaying the validation of the options. >> >>> (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the >>> same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains >>> linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command >>> line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly >>> especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design >>> fail...

.... `-L` is arguable because I do not see an obvious reason to add a search path from the compiler. You mentioned `-u`. Is there any other flag that you have in your mind? (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the >> same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains >> linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command >> line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly >> especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design >> failure that a COFF...

...that would be interesting. I can see -u being useful as well, but the point is that we can slowly grow the support after consideration by delaying the validation of the options. (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design failure that a COFF file contains just a single string i...

...l, but the point is that we can slowly grow >>> the support after consideration by delaying the validation of the options. >>> >>>> (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the >>>> same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains >>>> linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command >>>> line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly >>>> especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design >&...

...for ELF since it doesn’t have the concept of framework bundles (but the layout itself is interesting), and I just want to try to keep the door open for such features. > > (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design failure that a COFF file contains just a single string i...

Hello all, There was some interest from a number of a few people about adding support for embedded linker options to ELF. This would be an extension that requires linker support to actually work, but has significant prior art with PE/COFF as well as MachO both having support for this. The desire here is to actually add support to LLVM to pass along the necessary information into the object

...have the concept of framework > bundles (but the layout itself is interesting), and I just want to try to > keep the door open for such features. > > > (*1) One of the big annoyances that I noticed when I was implementing the >>> same feature for COFF is that the COFF's .drctve section that contains >>> linker options have to be tokenized in the same way as the Windows command >>> line does. So it needs to interpret double quotes and backslashes correctly >>> especially when handling space-containing pathnames. This is a design >>> fail...