Andrew Haley wrote:
We know you don't understand, but that isn't likely to change. Would
it not surely be better to cease this pointless argument and get on
with the job of improving debuginfo? This absolutist position you
seem to have adopted isn't helping.
If we could talk about "better" and "worse" rather than "correct" and
"incorrrect" we'd get much further.
I very much agree. Everyone is in favor of better debug information
if it is not too costly, we won't really see whether it is too costly
until we get some real data. But trying to argue for this in terms
of standards and conformance is a real red herring, the proper argument
for any improvement to debug information is utility.
