[PATCH 1/2] ld: Add --pdb option
Martin Storsjö
martin@martin.st
Mon Oct 3 18:58:19 GMT 2022
More information about the Binutils mailing list
Mon Oct 3 18:58:19 GMT 2022
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 1/2] ld: Add --pdb option
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 1/2] ld: Add --pdb option
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, 3 Oct 2022, Mark Harmstone wrote: > Hi Martin, > >> As I assume you're aware, lld's mingw port also supports PDB generation - >> and the description of this option also sounds like it's chosen to match >> lld's option for outputting PDB files - that's good! > > Yes, that's right. One notable difference is that the parameter here is > optional, unlike with lld, making it a lot easier to fit this into e.g. CMake > toolchain files or LDFLAGS. LLD also has got that behaviour, since https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/2c52ddf31f5421c5373923535b958b84c79772e3 in 2019. That's in particular why I wanted to make sure that this case works the same in binutils too. > It looks like the equals sign is mandatory when providing optional > parameters, otherwise it interprets the filename as another parameter. Yep, that's the case in LLD too. Unfortunately I didn't think of this behaviour initially when I first added this option - otherwise we could have had e.g. --pdb as a boolean option to just output to the default name, and e.g. --output-pdb=<name> if you wanted to specify the name. But oh well, "-pdb=" works, and I guess it isn't the worst thing in the world. > But it does mean that the form "-pdb=out.pdb" will work on both ld and > lld, which I think is the most important thing. TBH, I consider the "-pdb=" case equally important too - that's what most people would use in the end. // Martin
- Previous message (by thread): [PATCH 1/2] ld: Add --pdb option
- Next message (by thread): [PATCH 1/2] ld: Add --pdb option
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Binutils mailing list