------- Comment #25 from jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-03 00:01 ------- In fact the debug info is currently OK, at least for this testcase, because we generate debug info for the signature of X::func at the end of the definition of X, well before we start optimizing X::func.
But here's a C testcase where we lose debug info about a parameter that was optimized away: there are no formal parameters in the DWARF output for f. int i; static int f(int) __attribute ((noinline)); static int f(int x) { return i; } int main() { return f(42); } so, this becomes a wrong-debug regression, and should probably have its priority reduced. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42336