Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> writes: > This patch is OK.
Thank you.
Would the RMs (in CC) object to this patch going into 4.6?
> I also think it's a bug that the constructors of the anonymous struct
> have 't' in their names; they should also be anonymous with
> DW_AT_linkage_name.
I think this makes sense. Tom, Jan, would this be good enough from a
debug info consumer point of view? If yes I'll propose a separate patch
for this a bit later.
--
Dodji
