labath added a comment. In D68961#1711407 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961#1711407>, @shafik wrote:
> In D68961#1709708 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961#1709708>, @clayborg wrote: > > > Have many compilers supported DW_AT_export_symbols for a while now? If not, > > are there any serious issues introduced here that would change debugger > > behavior if this attribute is not emitted by a compiler? Or is this a new > > fix in clang that was recently introduced in order to fix an issue when > > debugging in lldb? > > > We don't except any regressions for code compiled with older compilers. We > are fixing the case that unnamed classes are identified as anonymous. The > anonymous classes cases should be caught in older revisions in > `ClangASTContext::AddFieldToRecordType` which does a > `Rec->setAnonymousStructOrUnion(true)` for those cases. Would it make sense to write a test in asm then? That way it would be obvious exactly what kind of debug info is being tested, and you could ensure both old&new compiler behavior is covered. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D68961 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
