zaks.anna added a comment. Hi Babati,
As far as I can see, the following comments from June 15th have not been addressed. It would be good if you could address them in the latest revision. "I would be interested in either replacing "issue_hash" or adding "issue_hash_bug_line_content" (or something like it) instead of adding another completely differently named field with very similar information. I see no reason for having both. I am not sure if we have any users of "issue_hash" right now, who will suffer from the change. Maybe we could have "issue_hash", "issue_hash_1"(offset based), and "issue_hash_2"(content of line) and add another field "issue_hash_version" that describes the version "issue_hash" is using? This needs tests!!!" http://reviews.llvm.org/D10305 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
