dblaikie added a comment.
> I would prefer to eliminate the `<params>` from the instance name as well,
> because our debugger reconstructs a name more to its liking from the
> parameter children. However, IIUC the name with params is used for
> deduplication in LTO, so that is probably not such a good idea. :-)
Though you have this out of tree? How do you cope with LTO there?
I've not fully refreshed myself on the previous conversations - but it looks
like my thought was that this state proposed here is weird/inconsistent: The
parameters are already in the name, so adding them in the DIEs seems redundant.
If the parameters weren't in the name then this change might make more sense.
================
Comment at: test/CodeGenCXX/debug-info-fwd-template-param.cpp:6-17
+template<typename T> class A {
+public:
+ A(T val);
+private:
+ T x;
+};
+
----------------
Probably simpler:
template<typename T> class A;
A<int> *p;
?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D14358
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
