Preserve relative ordering in ParsedOptions.arguments(for options:) #232
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is significant in at least one case (-F/-Fsystem ordering needs to be preserved), and isn't that expensive, so always preserve the ordering to ensure more predictable behavior
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci test |
DougGregor
approved these changes
Aug 30, 2020
Member
DougGregor
left a comment
DougGregor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very nice catch. The ordering here is indeed important, since it can affect which modules get found.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Another small bugfix: according to swiftlang/swift#8134, the relative ordering of "-F" and "-Fsystem" search paths needs to be preserved in frontend invocations. Instead of introducing a special case, I just changed the behavior of ParsedOptions.arguments(for options:) since it shouldn't be that expensive to always sort the options and I'm guessing this isn't the only case where it could end up mattering for correctness.