labath added a comment. What would you say if, instead of `AbbrevTableIndex`, we had a field like `AbbrevTableID`. The main difference would be that this "ID" field can be explicitly specified on the Abbrev table, and it does not have to be a sequentially increasing number (though it could of course be that by default).
The thing I'm trying to achieve is to make the yaml more robust against modifications/simplifications. E.g., it would be nice if deleting an abbrev table does not make all compile units suddenly refer to different tables. If the ids were present explicitly, compile units would be unaffected by this, and one would get an explicit error message if there was a compile unit left which still referred to the deleted abbrev table. (This is one of the aspects where an assembler is better than yaml, as symbolic labels in asm have these properties.) Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D83116/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D83116 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
