labath added a comment. In D138259#3941431 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D138259#3941431>, @clayborg wrote:
> "a type should be complete but isn't and you are losing information that > should have been available for you to debug". I agree, but there are still two (or more) ways to communicate that information. 1. "this type is complete" + "actually, I'm just missing the debug info and pretending it's complete" 2. "this type is incomplete" + "it is incomplete because I am missing its debug info" My question is which method would be more useful to the user. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D138259/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D138259 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
