https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83935
--- Comment #3 from Tom Tromey <tromey at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Pierre-Marie de Rodat from comment #2) > Thinking more about it, the rule that the discriminant entry must be a child > of the variant part entry sounds suspicious to me. TBH this did not make sense to me, either, which is partly why I originally wrote my patch the "more natural" way -- then this got caught in review, see https://reviews.llvm.org/D42082 > I guess I should report these questions to the DWARF discussion mailing > list. What do you think, Tom? It's worth a shot, though I think it was tried before, see http://lists.dwarfstd.org/pipermail/dwarf-discuss-dwarfstd.org/2006-August/001710.html