| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
|
When I talked about grouping the BOLT options, it doesn't mean separating them as variables. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| [-use-gnu-stack], | ||
| [-frame-opt=hot] | ||
| )] | ||
| ["${BOLT_GENERIC_OPTIONS} ${BOLT_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS}"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One pain point of this change is we have to care double quote in multiple places.
(defining BOLT_GENERIC_OPTIONS, defining BOLT_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS and BOLT_GENERIC_OPTIONS + BOLT_OPTIMIZATION_OPTIONS)
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I disagree; I don't see that as a "pain point".
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I disagree; I don't see that as a "pain point".
Well, My preference is don't care about double quotes as possible.
(This was the root cause of this issue in my guess)
I feel quite uncomfortable maintaining three elements that should be noted by double quotes.
It could be my personal preference. but yeah that's why I said pain point.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Currently, we only apply BOLT options to the optimisation stage. What if we want to add options during the instrumentation stage as well? In that case, won't it make sense to apply the generic flags to both stages? If so, will it not be easier to set the generic flags just once? Correct me if I'm wrong. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
I am not sure at this moment, but my mind is reducing the unnecessary option as possible. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Closing this, as grouping is no longer needed. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.