Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > OSS-Fuzz only provides one set of CXXFLAGS for use on both compiling > project C++ project files as well linking the fuzzers themselves. So in > the event that Git ever added any C++ sources, they would need to use > the same set of CXXFLAGS. OK. > Given that, do you agree with Stefan that it is more intuitive to define > CXXFLAGS next to the fuzzer build rules, since that's the only place > it's used for now? I am not sure. Until we gain other C++ targets (in other words, while linking with fuzzer is the only consumer of CXXFLAGS), I'd consider it similar to SPARSE_FLAGS and SPATCH_FLAGS, i.e. settings specific to an auxiliary tool that supports our development process, and it would make more sense to define it near them higher in the Makefile. I'd probably feel differently if this were called FUZZ_CXXFLAGS or something like that, which would make its natural home next to the rule to build $(FUZZ_PROGRAMS), though.
