dexonsmith added a comment. In D74813#2010859 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74813#2010859>, @erik.pilkington wrote:
> In D74813#2010767 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D74813#2010767>, @alexbdv wrote: > > > @erik.pilkington would the hash-based numbering be OK for now ? > > > Feel free to drop the demangler changes for now, but I would prefer including > the output of the mangled type in the symbol rather than it's hash. Dropping the demangler changes will introduce a regression for demangling blocks... I don't think we should do that. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D74813/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D74813 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
