DrSergei wrote:

> > Oh, yeah, GCC doesn't produce DW_TAG_template_type_parameter for unnamed 
> > template type parameters - yeah, it'd be a valid size optimization for them 
> > (relying on the uniqueness/identity of the DW_AT_name, I guess, for any 
> > type equivalence checking) - anything that can pull in more types into 
> > DWARF can be quite expensive (pulling in a whole type subgraph) so I could 
> > totally believe they did this for size optimization reasons.
> > We (Clang/LLVM) don't put any DW_TAG_template_type_parameters on 
> > (non-defining) declarations of template entities - except on SCE and when 
> > using Simplified Template Names. But we do put them all on for definitions, 
> > whether or not they're named/used.
> 
> Thanks for confirming!
> 
> @DrSergei want me to merge this?

Yes, thanks a lot

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/164251
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to