akhuang added a comment. In D97411#2595155 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97411#2595155>, @dblaikie wrote:
> In D97411#2595049 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97411#2595049>, @akhuang wrote: > >> In D97411#2594345 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97411#2594345>, @ldionne wrote: >> >>> I don't have an opinion about the attribute itself. I do have an opinion >>> about using that attribute in libc++ instead of fixing the underlying issue >>> (I think we shouldn't do it). Can you confirm what the problematic types >>> are? In another patch I saw `__hash_node`, `__hash_value_type`, >>> `__tree_node` and `__value_type`. Is that it? >> >> Not entirely sure - those were pointed out as types with missing debug info, >> but there might be more. I tried looking for types in libc++ that have a >> `value_type` member, since those seem to follow a similar pattern. Possibly >> `__forward_list_node`? > > Since we'll need to identify this list of types either way (to attribute or > to fix) might be worth making the list - I'd guess building all the libc++ > tests with/without ctor homing and seeing which types go missing as a result > might be informative? I started looking into some diffs of debug info in libc++ tests, but it's pretty hard to tell what's different - as far as I can see, there are just a bunch of `__hash_value_type`s and `__value_type`s. If I look in Visual Studio's debug info (on a file where I just construct all the libc++ types) I get errors for `__list_node`, `__tree_node`, and `__hash_node`. That's probably about it, and if there end up being more, it should be pretty straightforward to fix those later? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D97411/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D97411 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
