dblaikie added a comment. In D76801#2005264 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76801#2005264>, @labath wrote:
> In D76801#1997451 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D76801#1997451>, @dblaikie wrote: > > > Yeah, points all taken - as for this actual issue... I'm kind of inclined > > to say "hey, our template names already diverge somewhat - and this > > divergence is in the realm of acceptable by gdb (without an index) so... > > *thumbs up*/let's stick with it" > > > Another interesting aspect here is that the DW_AT_name outputs depend on the > c++ standard versions used. Yeah, I find that at least "weird", though not necessarily wrong. > This means we could get mismatches even with the same compiler if some > compile units use `-std=c++98`, and others `-std>=c++11` (hardly a > recommended practice but it does work if one knows what he is doing). > Compatibility with another compiler is one thing, but maybe > self-compatibility is more important (and easier to achieve) ? Yeah, I don't disagree with that - again, not quite sure I'd say it goes as far as "wrong" (I mean, DWARF doesn't spec this - so wrongness in our own judgment, not any authoritative sense) but yeah, perhaps insufficiently motivated quirkiness. > One way to achieve that would be by printing all type names in c++98 mode, > which (IIUC) is the same thing as what the windows folks are requesting.. Fair enough - I wouldn't object to that change being made & just having it the same for MSVC and DWARF in this case. (it's a /bit/ less good for C++11 and above users to get names with the extra space, but seems minor enough perhaps not to bother trying to preserve it given the complicaitons) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D76801/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D76801 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
